AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon Pro 5500M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is decisively faster than the AMD Radeon Pro 455 across every benchmark where both were measured, with wins of 140.2% to 200.8%. The 5500M is the clear choice for any task that stresses the GPU, while the 455’s only statistical advantage is its lower 35 W TDP and a slightly higher overall percentile rank. Benchmark data shows the 5500M delivers roughly 2.4x the Metal score, 3.0x the OpenCL score, and 2.9x the Vulkan score of the 455, making the performance gap so large that the 455 should only be considered for legacy systems or power-constrained designs.

The Verdict

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M if you need raw compute or graphics throughput. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas of +140.2% in Geekbench Metal, +200.8% in Geekbench OpenCL, and +187% in Geekbench Vulkan. Its 4.454 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, and 8 GB GDDR6 memory dwarf the 455’s 1,313.3 GFLOPS, 81.28 GB/s, and 2 GB GDDR5. The 5500M also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the 455 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8.

Choose the AMD Radeon Pro 455 only if you are constrained by the 35 W TDP or need a specific MXM Module form factor. The 455’s average benchmark score of 12831 is actually higher than the 5500M’s 11528, and its percentile rank of 52 beats the 5500M’s 51. However, that average is skewed because the 455 has only three benchmark results, all of which are Geekbench tests where it scores far lower than the 5500M. The 455’s nearest rivals—NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (delta 0%), AMD FirePro W5100 (-0.1%), AMD Radeon 740M (-0.3%)—all sit within 0.5% of its average, indicating it is a mid-pack performer. In contrast, the 5500M sits near the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (+0.4%) and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (-0.8%), a much faster tier.

For any modern workload, the 5500M is the only rational pick from the data. The 455’s higher average score is a statistical artifact, not a performance advantage.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural generations. The 5500M uses RDNA 1.0 on TSMC’s 7 nm process, with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die (40.5M transistors per mm²). The 455 uses GCN 4.0 on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die (24.4M per mm²). The 7 nm node gives the 5500M roughly 2.13x the transistor count in only 1.28x the die area.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The 5500M has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The 455 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs—exactly half in each category. This doubling explains the 5500M’s pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s for the 455, and texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s versus 41.04 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture also differs. The 5500M uses 8 GB GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) over a 128-bit bus, yielding 192.0 GB/s. The 455 uses 2 GB GDDR5 at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) over the same 128-bit width, yielding only 81.28 GB/s. That is a 2.36x bandwidth advantage for the 5500M.

Feature support is close but not identical. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6. The 5500M supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1); the 455 supports Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0). The 5500M’s FP16 throughput is 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the 455’s FP16 is 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1 ratio)—meaning the 5500M has a dedicated FP16 path that the 455 lacks.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins everywhere that matters for performance. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 38235 versus 15916 for the 455—a 140.2% lead. In Geekbench OpenCL, 31088 versus 10336—a 200.8% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, 35134 versus 12240—a 187% lead. These are not marginal victories; they are generational leaps.

The 5500M’s wins extend to theoretical throughput. Its FP32 of 4.454 TFLOPS is 3.39x the 455’s 1,313.3 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s is 3.39x the 455’s 41.04 GTexel/s. Its pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s is 3.39x the 455’s 13.68 GPixel/s. The consistent 3.39x ratio across these metrics reflects the doubling of cores and the higher clock speeds (1000 MHz base, 1450 MHz boost for the 5500M; no base or boost clocks listed for the 455).

AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins only in power efficiency and form factor. Its 35 W TDP is less than half the 5500M’s 85 W. It is also the only one of the two with a defined slot width (MXM Module), while the 5500M’s slot width is not listed. For a laptop where battery life and thermal envelope are paramount, the 455’s lower power draw is a genuine advantage—but it comes at the cost of 2x to 3x lower performance in every measured test.

The 455’s percentile rank of 52 versus 51 for the 5500M is misleading. That rank is based on the full benchmark suite, but the 455 has no PassMark results, while the 5500M has seven PassMark scores, including a PassMark G3D of 6732 and a GPU Compute of 3240. The 455’s average of 12831 comes from just three Geekbench tests, all of which are far lower than the 5500M’s corresponding scores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M. Its FP32 throughput is 4.454 TFLOPS versus 1,313.3 GFLOPS for the Radeon Pro 455, a 3.39x difference.

Q: Is the Radeon Pro 455 ever faster than the 5500M in any benchmark?

A: No. In the three head-to-head benchmarks (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan), the 5500M wins all three with deltas of +140.2%, +200.8%, and +187% respectively. The 455 has zero wins (winsA=3, winsB=0).

Q: Why does the Radeon Pro 455 have a higher average benchmark score than the 5500M?

A: The 455’s average of 12831 is based on only three Geekbench scores (15916 Metal, 10336 OpenCL, 12240 Vulkan). The 5500M’s average of 11528 includes seven PassMark scores (e.g., G3D 6732, GPU Compute 3240) that drag its average down, even though its Geekbench scores are 2.4x to 3.0x higher.

Q: What is the memory capacity and bandwidth difference?

A: The 5500M has 8 GB GDDR6 with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 455 has 2 GB GDDR5 with 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. That is a 4x capacity and 2.36x bandwidth advantage for the 5500M.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same API levels?

A: No. The 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The 455 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The 5500M also has FP16 at 2:1 ratio (8.909 TFLOPS) while the 455 has FP16 at 1:1 (1,313.3 GFLOPS).

Q: Which GPU has a lower power draw?

A: The Radeon Pro 455, at 35 W TDP, versus 85 W for the Radeon Pro 5500M. The 455 also comes in an MXM Module form factor, while the 5500M’s slot width is not listed.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench Metal test shows the largest absolute gap: the 5500M scores 38235 versus 15916 for the 455, a delta of 140.2%. This indicates that Metal-based rendering or compute tasks will run at roughly 2.4x speed on the 5500M. The 455’s score of 15916 is closer to the 5500M’s own OpenCL result of 31088 than to the 5500M’s Metal result—still, the 5500M leads by a wide margin.

Geekbench OpenCL delivers the largest percentage delta of the three tests: +200.8%. The 5500M scores 31088, while the 455 scores 10336. This 3.0x advantage likely stems from the 5500M’s higher shading unit count (1536 vs 768) and its doubled FP32 throughput. The 455’s OpenCL score is the lowest of its three results, suggesting OpenCL is not a strength of the GCN 4.0 architecture.

Geekbench Vulkan shows a +187% delta: 35134 for the 5500M versus 12240 for the 455. This is a 2.87x lead. The 5500M’s Vulkan 1.4 support versus the 455’s Vulkan 1.3 may contribute, but the core count and memory bandwidth differences are the primary drivers.

Across all three tests, the 5500M’s lowest score (31088 OpenCL) still exceeds the 455’s highest score (15916 Metal) by 95.3%. There is no overlap: the 5500M’s worst result is nearly double the 455’s best. This is a categorical performance tier separation, not a subtle difference.

The 5500M’s PassMark results (not available for the 455) show a G3D score of 6732 and GPU Compute of 3240. These fall within the range of its Geekbench scores when normalized, confirming that the 5500M is a consistent performer across different benchmark suites. The 455 has no PassMark data, so comparisons must rely solely on the three Geekbench tests.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 5500M | AMD Radeon Pro 455 |

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

| Process Node | 7 nm (TSMC) | 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 158 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.5M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1450 MHz | Not listed |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB GDDR6 | 2 GB GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 768 |

| TMUs | 96 | 48 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 46.40 GPixel/s | 13.68 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 139.2 GTexel/s | 41.04 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.454 TFLOPS | 1,313.3 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1) | 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 85 W | 35 W |

| Slot Width | Not listed | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2019-11-12 | 2016-10-29 |

| Percentile | 51 | 52 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 11528 | 12831 |

The 5500M has a three-year release advantage (2019 vs 2016), which explains the architectural leap from GCN 4.0 to RDNA 1.0. Every compute-related specification is at least doubled in the 5500M, while the 455 retains advantages only in TDP and form factor. The 455’s higher average benchmark score (12831 vs 11528) is solely due to the absence of PassMark results in its dataset, as its Geekbench scores are universally lower.