AMD Radeon 550X vs AMD Radeon Pro 450 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly between the two GPUs, and the AMD Radeon Pro 450 takes the lead in every recorded test. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the Pro 450 scores 9002 against the Radeon 550X's 8866, a 1.5% advantage. The Vulkan gap is far more pronounced: the Pro 450 records 10518, while the Radeon 550X trails at 8970, a 17.3% deficit. Across the two shared benchmarks, the Pro 450 claims both wins.

The Radeon Pro 450 also holds a higher average benchmark score of 10804 across all recorded tests, compared to 8918 for the Radeon 550X. This places the Pro 450 in the 49th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the 550X sits at the 45th percentile. The Pro 450's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 (10761, 0.4% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (10883, 0.7% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti (10690, 1.1% behind). The Radeon 550X, meanwhile, trades blows with the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (8863, 0.6% behind), the AMD Radeon R9 M265X (8851, 0.8% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 (9022, 1.2% ahead), and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition (9037, 1.3% ahead).

Where one card wins outright is in API-specific workloads. The Pro 450's Vulkan score of 10518 is not just higher than the 550X; it is closer to its own OpenCL result than the 550X's Vulkan score is to its OpenCL result. The 550X's Vulkan score of 8970 is actually lower than its OpenCL score of 8866, though only by a small margin. The Pro 450, by contrast, shows a 16.8% improvement from OpenCL to Vulkan, suggesting better optimization for that API in the recorded data. The 550X has no recorded Metal benchmark, while the Pro 450 posts a Geekbench Metal score of 12893, which is the highest single score for either card across all tests.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs are built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process and use AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, but they are distinct chips. The Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip, while the Radeon 550X uses Lexa. Baffin packs 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 24.4 million per mm². Lexa is smaller in both respects: 2,200 million transistors on 103 mm², at 21.4 million per mm². The Pro 450's die is roughly 19.4% larger by area and carries 36.4% more transistors.

The compute configuration differs as well. The Pro 450 has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The Radeon 550X has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is 128 more shading units and 8 more TMUs for the Pro 450, while ROP count is identical. Despite the Pro 450's larger shader array, the 550X posts higher raw throughput figures because of its higher clocks. The 550X has a base clock of 1082 MHz and a boost clock of 1218 MHz, while the Pro 450 lists no base or boost clock in the database. The 550X reaches 19.49 GPixel/s pixel rate and 38.98 GTexel/s texture rate, while the Pro 450 records 12.80 GPixel/s and 32.00 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 1,247.2 GFLOPS for the 550X versus 1,024.0 GFLOPS for the Pro 450. Both cards support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, so the same 1,247.2 and 1,024.0 GFLOPS figures apply.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and bus width, but not in speed. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The Pro 450's memory runs at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for 81.28 GB/s of bandwidth. The 550X's memory runs at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) for 112.0 GB/s, a 37.8% bandwidth advantage. The 550X also has a higher TDP at 50 W versus 35 W for the Pro 450. The 550X is a dual-slot card with no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W; the Pro 450 uses an MXM module with no listed power connector requirements. The 550X has a 145 mm (5.7 inch) board length and display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Pro 450's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent.

The Pro 450 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation, while the 550X is from the Polaris (RX 500X) generation. The 550X lists its predecessor as Polaris and successor as Vega; the Pro 450 has no listed predecessor or successor. Both cards are end-of-life. The Pro 450 was released on 2016-10-29, and the 550X on 2019-03-26.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 450 has an average benchmark score of 10804, compared to 8918 for the AMD Radeon 550X.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: The Pro 450 scores 10518 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the 550X scores 8970, giving the Pro 450 a 17.3% lead.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. Only the Pro 450 has a recorded Metal benchmark score, at 12893.

Q: Which card has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Radeon 550X has higher memory bandwidth at 112.0 GB/s, versus 81.28 GB/s for the Pro 450, due to faster 7 Gbps effective memory versus 5.1 Gbps effective.

Q: Are the two cards based on the same architecture?

A: Both use GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process, but the Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip with 3,000 million transistors, while the 550X uses Lexa with 2,200 million transistors.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The Radeon 550X has a higher pixel rate of 19.49 GPixel/s, while the Pro 450 records 12.80 GPixel/s.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 450 | AMD Radeon 550X |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Chip | Baffin | Lexa |

| Generation | Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) | Polaris (RX 500X) |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1082 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1218 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 81.28 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 512 |

| TMUs | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 12.80 GPixel/s | 19.49 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 32.00 GTexel/s | 38.98 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,024.0 GFLOPS | 1,247.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1) | 1,247.2 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Board Length | Not listed | 145 mm (5.7 inches) |

| Release Date | 2016-10-29 | 2019-03-26 |

| Predecessor | Not listed | Polaris |

| Successor | Not listed | Vega |

The table shows that the two cards share memory size, type, bus width, ROP count, process node, foundry, architecture, and API support. The differences are concentrated in the chip, clock speeds, bandwidth, shader counts, and physical design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two head-to-head comparisons, and the AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins both. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Pro 450 scores 9002 against the 550X's 8866, a 1.5% difference. This is a narrow margin, well within the range of run-to-run variation for many GPUs, but the recorded data still favors the Pro 450. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 17.3%: 10518 for the Pro 450 versus 8970 for the 550X. That is the single largest performance differential between the two cards in any recorded test.

The OpenCL result is notable because the 550X has higher theoretical throughput. Its FP32 rating of 1,247.2 GFLOPS exceeds the Pro 450's 1,024.0 GFLOPS by 21.8%, and its memory bandwidth of 112.0 GB/s is 37.8% higher. Yet in the OpenCL benchmark, the 550X still trails. The Pro 450's larger shader count, 640 versus 512, and its 3,000 million transistors versus 2,200 million, appear to compensate for the 550X's clock and bandwidth advantages in this workload.

The Vulkan result amplifies the same trend. A 17.3% lead for the Pro 450 is substantial for two GPUs from the same architecture generation and process node. The 550X's higher pixel rate (19.49 GPixel/s) and texture rate (38.98 GTexel/s) do not translate into a benchmark win in either API. The Pro 450's only recorded loss in the broader database is relative to the NVIDIA GeForce MX350, which sits 0.7% ahead in average score. The 550X, by contrast, trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 by 1.2% and the NVIDIA TITAN V CEO Edition by 1.3% in average score, while leading the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 by 0.6% and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X by 0.8%.

The pattern across both head-to-head tests is consistent: the Pro 450 wins regardless of API, with the margin growing from 1.5% in OpenCL to 17.3% in Vulkan. The 550X has no recorded Metal benchmark, so the Pro 450's Metal score of 12893 stands as the highest single-test result for either card, exceeding its own OpenCL score by 43.2% and its Vulkan score by 22.6%.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD Radeon Pro 450 as the stronger GPU in recorded benchmarks. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a 21.1% higher average benchmark score, and sits at a higher percentile rank. For users prioritizing compute performance in OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the Pro 450 is the clear choice. Its 17.3% Vulkan lead is decisive, and its 1.5% OpenCL lead, while small, still favors it.

The Radeon 550X is not without advantages in the specification sheet. It has higher clocks, more memory bandwidth, higher pixel and texture rates, and higher FP32 throughput. It also has a higher TDP, which in some contexts can indicate more sustained performance headroom, and it offers a more conventional dual-slot form factor with dedicated display outputs. But none of these specification advantages translate into a benchmark win in the recorded data. The 550X's average score of 8918 places it near the AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 and the AMD Radeon R9 M265X, both of which trail it by less than 1%. The Pro 450's average score of 10804 places it among more capable competitors like the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti.

For a system builder choosing between these two, the decision depends on the workload. If the task involves Vulkan rendering or general compute, the Pro 450's benchmark results make it the safer pick. If the system requires a dual-slot card with a 250 W suggested PSU and no extra power connectors, the 550X has the physical design advantage. However, the database shows no benchmark scenario where the 550X outperforms the Pro 450. The Pro 450 wins both recorded tests, and its higher Metal score adds another point in its favor for Apple-centric workflows. The 550X, by contrast, offers no recorded benchmark where it leads. The verdict from the measurements is straightforward: the AMD Radeon Pro 450 is the faster GPU in every recorded test, and the AMD Radeon 550X is the card with higher theoretical specs but lower measured performance.