AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a clear picture in the direct comparison between the NVIDIA RTX A5500 and the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60. Across the two benchmark tests available in the database, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 secures victory in both instances, establishing a decisive performance gap.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 scores 174,637, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 trails significantly with 92,488. This represents a delta of 88.8% in favor of the NVIDIA card. The magnitude of this difference suggests that in compute workloads utilizing OpenCL, the RTX A5500 operates in a distinctly higher performance class, nearly doubling the output of the MI60 in this specific synthetic workload.

The Geekbench Vulkan test tells a similar story, though with a slightly narrower margin. The RTX A5500 achieves 155,797 points, while the MI60 manages 92,444. The delta here is 68.5% in favor of the NVIDIA product. While still a substantial advantage, the reduced gap compared to OpenCL hints that the Vulkan API may leverage some of the MI60's architectural strengths more effectively, or alternatively, that the RTX A5500's Vulkan drivers do not extract quite the same level of performance as its OpenCL path.

Looking at the broader context within the database's nearest rival groupings provides additional insight into where each card stands. The RTX A5500's average benchmark score is 165,217, placing it in the 97th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest competitors include the NVIDIA RTX 4500 Ada Generation with an average score of 166,094, a delta of -0.5%, meaning the A5500 is essentially neck-and-neck with that newer generation card. It also sits 0.2% ahead of the AMD Radeon PRO W7800 (average score 164,894) and 1.7% ahead of the NVIDIA A100 PCIe 40 GB (average score 162,504). Interestingly, it trails the AMD Radeon Pro W6900X by 2% (average score 168,574).

For the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60, the average benchmark score is 92,466, which places it in the 93rd percentile of all GPUs. Its rival group shows it leading the NVIDIA RTX A4500 by 0.9% (average score 91,671) and the NVIDIA RTX A4500 Mobile by 1.5% (average score 91,134). However, it falls behind the AMD Radeon Pro VII by 4.8% (average score 97,131) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900M by 5.2% (average score 97,487). This positioning indicates that while the MI60 is a competent performer, it is not at the top of its class even within its own vendor's lineup, whereas the A5500 competes at the very highest tier of workstation GPUs.

The Verdict

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the NVIDIA RTX A5500 is the superior choice for raw compute performance as measured by Geekbench. With a 88.8% lead in OpenCL and a 68.5% lead in Vulkan, the RTX A5500 effectively doubles the performance of the MI60 in the former test. The data indicates that any user seeking maximum compute throughput in these APIs should select the NVIDIA RTX A5500 without hesitation.

The RTX A5500's 97th percentile ranking versus the MI60's 93rd percentile further reinforces this conclusion. The NVIDIA card sits among the elite of all GPUs in the database, while the AMD card, though respectable, resides a tier below. The RTX A5500's average score of 165,217 is 72,751 points higher than the MI60's 92,466, a difference of roughly 78.7%.

For professionals whose workloads are dominated by OpenCL or Vulkan compute tasks, the choice is clear. The performance advantage of the RTX A5500 is so substantial that it would be difficult to justify the MI60 based on benchmark performance alone. However, the analysis does not end at raw speed; the significant architectural and specification differences discussed below may inform a more nuanced decision for specific use cases, particularly those involving memory capacity or specialized compute features.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures, which explains the dramatic performance delta. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 is based on the GA102 chip, using the Ampere architecture. This is a 8 nm process manufactured by Samsung, with a massive 28,300 million transistors packed into a 628 mm² die. The transistor density is 45.1M per mm².

In contrast, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 utilizes the Vega 20 chip, based on the older GCN 5.1 architecture. It is fabricated on a more advanced 7 nm process from TSMC, yet contains only 13,230 million transistors on a smaller 331 mm² die, resulting in a lower transistor density of 40.0M per mm².

The architectural philosophies diverge sharply. The Ampere architecture in the RTX A5500 includes dedicated hardware features such as 80 RT cores for ray tracing and 320 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The GCN 5.1 architecture in the MI60 has no RT cores and no tensor cores, meaning it lacks specialized hardware for these emerging workloads. This is a critical distinction that cannot be ignored.

The shading unit count tells a story of brute force versus efficiency. The RTX A5500 houses 10,240 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The MI60, by comparison, has 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. Despite having fewer than half the shading units, the MI60's higher boost clock (1800 MHz vs 1665 MHz) helps it achieve 14.75 TFLOPS of FP32 performance. However, the RTX A5500's sheer unit count propels it to 34.10 TFLOPS FP32, more than double the MI60's output.

The FP16 capabilities present an interesting divergence. The RTX A5500 achieves 34.10 TFLOPS FP16 with a 1:1 ratio to FP32, indicating full-rate FP16 execution. The MI60 achieves 29.49 TFLOPS FP16 with a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 rate. This suggests that in workloads specifically optimized for FP16, the MI60 closes the gap considerably, though it still trails the A5500 by about 13.5%.

Specification Differences

Beyond architecture, the specification sheets reveal several key differences that impact usability and performance characteristics.

Memory configuration is one of the most striking contrasts. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 comes with 24 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, delivering 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 offers a larger 32 GB of HBM2 memory on a much wider 4096-bit bus, achieving 1.02 TB/s of bandwidth. The MI60's bandwidth advantage is significant, approximately 33% higher, which could benefit memory-intensive workloads that fit within its capacity.

Clock speeds differ as well. The MI60 has a higher base clock of 1200 MHz and a higher boost clock of 1800 MHz, compared to the A5500's 1080 MHz base and 1665 MHz boost. However, the memory clocks are wildly different, with the A5500 running at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) versus the MI60's 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective). This reflects the different memory technologies in use.

Power consumption is notably higher for the MI60, rated at 300 W TDP versus the A5500's 230 W. The power connector requirements reflect this: the MI60 needs both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector, while the A5500 requires only a single 8-pin. The suggested PSU for the MI60 is 700 W, while the A5500 suggests a 550 W unit.

Display outputs are another differentiator. The A5500 offers four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, making it suitable for multi-display workstation setups. The MI60 provides only a single mini-DisplayPort 1.4a, clearly indicating its intended role as a compute accelerator rather than a display-oriented card.

API support also differs. The A5500 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The MI60 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The newer API versions on the A5500 may enable additional features in compatible software.

Physical dimensions are nearly identical, with both cards measuring 267 mm in length and approximately 112 mm (A5500) or 111 mm (MI60) in height, both dual-slot designs. The release dates differ substantially, with the MI60 launched in November 2018 and the A5500 in March 2022, a gap of over three years that explains many of the architectural advancements in the NVIDIA product.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 achieves 34.10 TFLOPS FP32, which is more than double the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60's 14.75 TFLOPS FP32.

Q: Does the AMD card have any advantage in memory capacity or bandwidth?

A: Yes, the MI60 offers 32 GB of HBM2 memory with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth, compared to the A5500's 24 GB GDDR6 with 768.0 GB/s. The MI60 has both more capacity and higher bandwidth.

Q: What is the performance gap in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX A5500 scores 174,637, while the MI60 scores 92,488, giving the NVIDIA card an 88.8% advantage in that specific benchmark.

Q: Does the MI60 support ray tracing or AI acceleration hardware?

A: No. The MI60 based on GCN 5.1 has no RT cores and no tensor cores. The RTX A5500, based on Ampere, includes 80 RT cores and 320 tensor cores.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient based on TDP and performance?

A: The RTX A5500 has a 230 W TDP and delivers 34.10 TFLOPS FP32. The MI60 has a 300 W TDP and delivers 14.75 TFLOPS FP32. The NVIDIA card delivers more than double the FP32 performance while consuming less power.

Q: Can both cards be used in similar multi-display workstation configurations?

A: No. The RTX A5500 has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the MI60 has only one mini-DisplayPort 1.4a output, making the A5500 far more suitable for multi-monitor setups.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the NVIDIA RTX A5500 wins in every measured category. It dominates both the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests, with wins in 2 out of 2 head-to-head benchmarks. The only area where the MI60 shows a theoretical advantage based on specifications, not benchmarks, is in memory capacity and bandwidth.

For general-purpose compute workloads, particularly those leveraging OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A5500 is the clear winner. Its 88.8% lead in OpenCL suggests that applications relying on this API will see near-double performance. The higher shading unit count and newer architecture contribute to this dominance.

The RTX A5500 also wins for any workload involving ray tracing or AI inference, given its dedicated RT cores and tensor cores. The MI60 lacks these specialized units entirely, meaning software that can leverage them will run significantly faster on the NVIDIA card, or may not run at all on the AMD card.

For applications that are extremely memory-bound and require more than 24 GB of VRAM, the MI60's 32 GB capacity and 1.02 TB/s bandwidth could be advantageous. However, this advantage is purely theoretical based on specifications, as no benchmark data in the database confirms superior real-world performance in such scenarios. The MI60's higher bandwidth could potentially benefit large data sets that fit within its memory, but the compute performance deficit remains substantial.

The MI60 also holds a release date advantage in terms of legacy: it has been available since November 2018, meaning a longer track record in production environments. However, both cards are now marked as end-of-life in the database, so this is of limited practical relevance.

For professionals requiring multi-display output, the A5500's four DisplayPort connectors make it the obvious choice. The MI60's single mini-DisplayPort effectively relegates it to headless compute server roles.

In summary, the data overwhelmingly favors the NVIDIA RTX A5500 for almost every use case. The only scenario where the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 might be considered is if an application demands more than 24 GB of memory and can tolerate a significant reduction in compute throughput, or if a system has strict power delivery constraints that favor the MI60's specific connector arrangement, though this seems unlikely given its higher TDP. For all other purposes, the benchmark results indicate the RTX A5500 is the superior hardware.