Radeon PRO W7700 vs RX 560X Mobile

Place in the ranking	423	61
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	55.86
Power efficiency	11.77	18.16
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	11 April 2018 (6 years ago)	13 November 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1024	3072
Core clock speed	1275 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1202 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	81.60	499.2
Floating-point processing power	2.611 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	96
TMUs	64	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	48

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1450 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	92.8 GB/s	576.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 2.1

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

−341%

150−160
+341%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

6.66

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

23
−335%

100−105

+335%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25 −340%	110−120 +340%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	30 −333%	130−140 +333%
Battlefield 5	49 −349%	220−230 +349%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −332%	95−100 +332%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 −341%	75−80 +341%
Far Cry 5	35 −329%	150−160 +329%
Far Cry New Dawn	42 −329%	180−190 +329%
Forza Horizon 4	109 −313%	450−500 +313%
Hitman 3	24 −317%	100−105 +317%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 −350%	270−280 +350%
Metro Exodus	45 −344%	200−210 +344%
Red Dead Redemption 2	47 −347%	210−220 +347%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	56 −346%	250−260 +346%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 −348%	300−310 +348%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	49 −349%	220−230 +349%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21 −329%	90−95 +329%
Battlefield 5	36 −344%	160−170 +344%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −332%	95−100 +332%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 −333%	65−70 +333%
Far Cry 5	29 −348%	130−140 +348%
Far Cry New Dawn	28 −329%	120−130 +329%
Forza Horizon 4	105 −329%	450−500 +329%
Hitman 3	23 −335%	100−105 +335%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 −350%	270−280 +350%
Metro Exodus	36 −344%	160−170 +344%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −319%	130−140 +319%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	42 −329%	180−190 +329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −348%	130−140 +348%
Watch Dogs: Legion	65−70 −348%	300−310 +348%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 −338%	70−75 +338%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 −341%	75−80 +341%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 −332%	95−100 +332%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 −323%	55−60 +323%
Far Cry 5	21 −329%	90−95 +329%
Forza Horizon 4	38 −347%	170−180 +347%
Hitman 3	21 −329%	90−95 +329%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 −350%	270−280 +350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	37 −332%	160−170 +332%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	22 −332%	95−100 +332%
Watch Dogs: Legion	11 −309%	45−50 +309%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30
−333%

130−140

+333%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 −332%	95−100 +332%
Far Cry New Dawn	16−18 −341%	75−80 +341%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−12 −309%	45−50 +309%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	7−8 −329%	30−33 +329%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −309%	45−50 +309%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −323%	55−60 +323%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −342%	230−240 +342%
Hitman 3	14−16 −329%	60−65 +329%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −335%	100−105 +335%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −341%	75−80 +341%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18 −338%	70−75 +338%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −309%	45−50 +309%
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75 −329%	300−310 +329%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

−344%

80−85
+344%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
Hitman 3	7−8 −329%	30−33 +329%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 −340%	220−230 +340%
Metro Exodus	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 −329%	60−65 +329%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −338%	35−40 +338%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

10−11

−350%

45−50
+350%

This is how RX 560X Mobile and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 341% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.05	49.84
Recency	11 April 2018	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	190 Watt

RX 560X Mobile has 192.3% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 351% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 560X Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 560X Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.