AMD Radeon Pro 560 vs AMD Radeon HD 6990

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 560 and AMD Radeon HD 6990 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 560

• Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• Around 9% higher core clock speed: 907 MHz vs 830 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 40 nm
• 5x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 375 Watt
• Around 2% higher memory clock speed: 5080 MHz vs 5000 MHz
• Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3475 vs 3013
• Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 724 vs 630
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 41.388 vs 17.264
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.837 vs 1.76
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4695 vs 4562
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4695 vs 4562

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6990

• 4.8x more texture fill rate: 2x 79.7 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 58.05 GTexel / s
• 3x more pipelines: 2x 1536 vs 1024
• 2.7x better floating-point performance: 2x 2,549.8 gflops vs 1,858 gflops
• Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 840.452 vs 614.695
• Around 72% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 53.903 vs 31.274
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 265.302 vs 189.085
• Around 63% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3713 vs 2280
• Around 63% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3713 vs 2280

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 560
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6990

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3475 3013
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	724 630
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	41.388 17.264
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	614.695 840.452
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.837 1.76
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	31.274 53.903
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	189.085 265.302
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4695 4562
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2280 3713
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4695 4562
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2280 3713
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 3356

Compare specifications (specs)