AMD Radeon HD 7770M vs AMD Radeon Pro 5500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains one shared benchmark between these two mobile GPUs: Geekbench Metal. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235, while the AMD Radeon HD 7770M scores 13,536. This represents a 64.6% deficit for the older part, meaning the Pro 5500M delivers roughly 2.8 times the Metal performance. That is a massive gap, and it is not a close contest by any metric.

Looking at the rival positioning, the HD 7770M’s average benchmark score of 13,536 places it within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon RX 9070 XT (13,543), and 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 570 (13,515). The database also shows it 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA P106-090 (13,470) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13,407). These are all near-identical scores, indicating that the HD 7770M sits in a tightly clustered performance band where tiny deltas separate entries.

The Pro 5500M’s average benchmark score, however, is 11,528, which is lower than its Metal score because it also includes OpenCL, Vulkan, and Passmark results. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (11,479, 0.4% slower), the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11,627, 0.8% faster), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680, 1.3% faster), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11,261, 2.4% slower). The Pro 5500M sits in a different performance tier entirely, one where competing parts are far more recent desktop-class GPUs.

The single head-to-head result is unambiguous: the Pro 5500M wins the only directly comparable test. The delta of -64.6% for the HD 7770M confirms that the older chip is not merely behind, it is behind by a wide margin. In practical terms, a workload that takes one second on the Pro 5500M would take roughly 2.8 seconds on the HD 7770M, assuming linear scaling.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural generations. The HD 7770M uses the Chelsea chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Pro 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, also fabricated by TSMC but on a 7 nm node. The process shrink is substantial, but the transistor counts tell a larger story: the Chelsea die packs 1,500 million transistors into 123 mm², while Navi 14 integrates 6,400 million transistors into 158 mm². That translates to a transistor density of 12.2 million per mm² for the old part versus 40.5 million per mm² for the new one, a 3.3x density improvement.

Core configuration differs dramatically. The HD 7770M has 512 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. The Pro 5500M has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. That is a 3x increase in shaders, a 3x increase in TMUs, and a 2x increase in ROPs. The fill rates reflect these changes: the HD 7770M achieves 10.80 GPixel/s and 21.60 GTexel/s, while the Pro 5500M reaches 46.40 GPixel/s and 139.2 GTexel/s. The Pro 5500M also computes 4.454 TFLOPS FP32 versus 691.2 GFLOPS for the HD 7770M, a 6.4x difference. The newer part additionally supports FP16 at 8.909 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the older chip has no FP16 capability listed.

Memory is another clear separator. The HD 7770M uses 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with a memory clock of 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 64.00 GB/s. The Pro 5500M uses 8 GB of GDDR6, also on a 128-bit bus, but with a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) and bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. That is a 3x bandwidth improvement and an 8x capacity increase. The memory interface width is identical, but the newer memory type and higher clock speed make a significant difference.

The bus interface also differs: the HD 7770M uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the Pro 5500M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The newer part has half the lanes but twice the bandwidth per lane, so effective throughput is similar on paper. Power consumption is listed at 32 W for the HD 7770M versus 85 W for the Pro 5500M, a 2.7x increase. The Pro 5500M has no power connectors, and both are portable device dependent for display outputs.

API support shows generational progress. The HD 7770M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The newer part has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version, though both are listed as end-of-life products.

Where Each One Wins

The HD 7770M wins in power efficiency. At 32 W, it consumes less than half the power of the Pro 5500M’s 85 W, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where thermals and battery life are priorities. Its smaller die size of 123 mm² also suggests lower manufacturing cost per wafer, though that is not directly measured here.

The Pro 5500M wins in every raw performance category. Its Metal score is 2.8x higher, its FP32 throughput is 6.4x higher, its texture rate is 6.4x higher, and its pixel rate is 4.3x higher. It has 8x more memory capacity and 3x more bandwidth. For any compute or graphics workload that can use these resources, the Pro 5500M is the clear choice.

The HD 7770M’s nearest rivals are all roughly equal in score, which suggests it was a well-balanced part for its era. The Pro 5500M’s nearest rivals include the GTX 1660 and RX 7800 XT, desktop-class GPUs, indicating that the mobile Pro 5500M punches well above its weight class relative to older mobile parts.

For legacy applications that only use DirectX 11 or OpenGL, the HD 7770M still functions, but the Pro 5500M shows higher Passmark scores across the board: DirectX 9 (96 vs no data), DirectX 10 (36), DirectX 11 (42), DirectX 12 (29), G2D (648), G3D (6732), and GPU compute (3240). The HD 7770M has no Passmark scores recorded, so direct comparison is not possible, but the Pro 5500M’s numbers are all nonzero and generally decent for a mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher Metal benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235 in Geekbench Metal, while the AMD Radeon HD 7770M scores 13,536. The Pro 5500M is 64.6% faster in this test.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The HD 7770M has 1024 MB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 64.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The newer part has 8x the capacity and 3x the bandwidth.

Q: What are the architectural differences?

A: The HD 7770M uses GCN 1.0 architecture with 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The Pro 5500M uses RDNA 1.0 with 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The newer chip is built on a 7 nm process versus 28 nm.

Q: Which GPU has higher power consumption?

A: The Pro 5500M is rated at 85 W, while the HD 7770M is rated at 32 W. The older part uses significantly less power.

Q: What is the transistor count difference?

A: The HD 7770M has 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die. The Pro 5500M has 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. The newer part has over 4x the transistors.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life products. The HD 7770M was released in April 2012, and the Pro 5500M was released in November 2019.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is overwhelmingly faster than the AMD Radeon HD 7770M in every measured performance category. The 64.6% Metal score gap is decisive, and the architectural differences confirm that the newer part is in a completely different class. The HD 7770M’s only advantage is power draw, where it uses 53 W less than the Pro 5500M.

For users with workloads that fit within the HD 7770M’s 1024 MB memory limit and 691.2 GFLOPS compute capacity, the older chip remains functional. It can handle DirectX 12 (11_1) titles and runs Vulkan 1.2.170. However, the Pro 5500M provides 4.454 TFLOPS FP32, 8 GB of memory, and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, which enables far more demanding applications, including modern compute workloads and higher-resolution textures.

The percentile rankings show the HD 7770M at the 54th percentile and the Pro 5500M at the 51st percentile among all GPUs. This seems counterintuitive given the performance gap, but it likely reflects the different benchmark suites used for each part. The HD 7770M’s average score comes from a single Metal test, while the Pro 5500M’s average includes OpenCL, Vulkan, and multiple Passmark tests, which drag its average down relative to its Metal score.

The choice is clear for anyone needing maximum performance: the Pro 5500M. The choice is also clear for anyone needing minimum power consumption: the HD 7770M. There is no middle ground where the two compete evenly.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 7770M | AMD Radeon Pro 5500M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 1,500 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.2M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not listed | 1000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not listed | 1450 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective) | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 1024 MB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 64.00 GB/s | 192.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 32 | 96 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 10.80 GPixel/s | 46.40 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 21.60 GTexel/s | 139.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 691.2 GFLOPS | 4.454 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not listed | 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 32 W | 85 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Power Connectors | Not listed | None |

| Release Date | 2012-04-23 | 2019-11-12 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | End-of-life |