AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon R9 M275X Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 and AMD Radeon R9 M275X are two very different mobile graphics solutions, despite their shared vendor and similar memory configuration. The recorded data indicates that neither card dominates outright, with each securing one win in the head-to-head benchmark comparison. The Radeon Pro 455 is the better choice for users prioritizing modern API performance, specifically Vulkan, where it leads by 22.8%. The Radeon R9 M275X, conversely, is the stronger option for OpenCL compute workloads, outperforming the Pro 455 by 7.7% in that specific test.

Looking at the aggregate data, the Pro 455 holds a clear advantage in overall average benchmark score, recording 12,831 points compared to the R9 M275X's 10,582 points. This places the Pro 455 in the 52nd percentile of all GPUs, while the R9 M275X sits in the 49th percentile. The Pro 455's nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590, posts an average score of 12,830, putting the two effectively at parity with a delta of 0%. The R9 M275X's closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 6600S at 10,629 points, a 0.4% difference. For a system builder choosing between these two end-of-life parts, the Pro 455 is the more future-proof option due to its superior API support and higher overall performance ceiling, while the R9 M275X remains relevant only for legacy OpenCL-focused tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture. The Radeon Pro 455 is built on GCN 4.0 using the Baffin chip, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Radeon R9 M275X uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Venus chip, produced on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This generational gap is reflected in transistor density: the Pro 455 packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, achieving a density of 24.4M per mm². The R9 M275X also uses a 123 mm² die, but contains only 1,500 million transistors, resulting in a density of 12.2M per mm². The smaller process node gives the Pro 455 a significant efficiency advantage in terms of transistor packing.

The compute configurations differ as well. The Pro 455 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The R9 M275X has fewer resources, with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The newer architecture also brings a notable API advantage: the Pro 455 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R9 M275X is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards support OpenGL 4.6. The memory subsystem is similar on the surface, with both using 2 GB of GDDR5 over a 128-bit bus, but the Pro 455 runs its memory at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for 81.28 GB/s bandwidth, while the R9 M275X operates at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for 72.00 GB/s. Another key difference is the bus interface: the Pro 455 uses PCIe 3.0 x8, whereas the R9 M275X uses the wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 records an average benchmark score of 12,831, which is substantially higher than the AMD Radeon R9 M275X's average of 10,582.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 is the clear winner in Vulkan, scoring 12,240 against the R9 M275X's 9,964, giving the Pro 455 a 22.8% advantage in that API.

Q: Which card performs better in OpenCL compute workloads?

A: The Radeon R9 M275X wins in the OpenCL benchmark, scoring 11,200 compared to the Pro 455's 10,336, a 7.7% difference in favor of the older card.

Q: Are both GPUs considered end-of-life products?

A: Yes, the production status for both the AMD Radeon Pro 455 and the AMD Radeon R9 M275X is listed as end-of-life in the database.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The Radeon Pro 455 is manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Radeon R9 M275X uses a 28 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Do both cards have the same memory configuration?

A: Both feature 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the Pro 455 achieves higher bandwidth at 81.28 GB/s versus the R9 M275X's 72.00 GB/s due to its higher memory clock.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The Radeon Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, while the R9 M275X uses Venus with GCN 1.0. The process node is 14 nm for the Pro 455 versus 28 nm for the R9 M275X, with the foundry being GlobalFoundries for the former and TSMC for the latter. Transistor count stands at 3,000 million for the Pro 455 and 1,500 million for the R9 M275X. Both have a die size of 123 mm², but transistor density differs at 24.4M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm².

The clock specifications show the R9 M275X has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 925 MHz, while the Pro 455 has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory clocks differ, with the Pro 455 at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) and the R9 M275X at 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). Memory bandwidth favors the Pro 455 at 81.28 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s. The shading unit count is 768 for the Pro 455 and 640 for the R9 M275X, with TMUs at 48 versus 40. Both have 16 ROPs. Pixel rate is 13.68 GPixel/s for the Pro 455 and 14.80 GPixel/s for the R9 M275X, while texture rate is 41.04 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,313.3 GFLOPS for the Pro 455 and 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the R9 M275X. The Pro 455 lists FP16 at 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1), while the R9 M275X has no FP16 data.

The Pro 455 has a TDP of 35 W, while the R9 M275X has no TDP listed. The Pro 455 uses an MXM Module slot width with no power connectors required, while the R9 M275X has no slot width or power connector data. The bus interface is PCIe 3.0 x8 for the Pro 455 and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the R9 M275X. Display outputs are listed as portable device dependent for the Pro 455, with no display output data for the R9 M275X. DirectX support is 12 (12_0) for the Pro 455 and 12 (11_1) for the R9 M275X. Vulkan support is 1.3 versus 1.2.170. Release dates are 2016-10-29 for the Pro 455 and 2014-01-27 for the R9 M275X. The R9 M275X has a predecessor listed as Solar System and a successor as Polaris Mobile, while the Pro 455 has no listed predecessor or successor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head benchmark comparisons between these GPUs, and the results illustrate a clear split in workload preferences. In the geekbench_opencl test, the AMD Radeon R9 M275X takes the win with a score of 11,200 against the AMD Radeon Pro 455's 10,336. This represents a 7.7% advantage for the older card. The R9 M275X's higher base clock of 900 MHz and boost clock of 925 MHz likely contributes to this OpenCL result, despite its lower shading unit count of 640 versus 768.

The geekbench_vulkan test tells a different story. Here, the Radeon Pro 455 scores 12,240, decisively beating the R9 M275X's 9,964. The 22.8% delta in favor of the Pro 455 is substantial and aligns with the architectural advantages of GCN 4.0 over GCN 1.0. The newer architecture's Vulkan 1.3 support, compared to the R9 M275X's Vulkan 1.2.170, provides better driver optimization and API feature utilization. This Vulkan result is the single largest performance gap between the two cards across all recorded benchmarks.

Beyond the direct head-to-head tests, the average benchmark scores reinforce the Pro 455's overall superiority. The Pro 455's avgBenchmarkScore of 12,831 is 21.3% higher than the R9 M275X's 10,582. This aggregate metric includes the Pro 455's additional geekbench_metal score of 15,916, a test that the R9 M275X does not have recorded. The Pro 455 also achieves a higher percentile ranking at 52 versus 49, placing it above the R9 M275X in the broader GPU performance distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 wins in scenarios that leverage modern graphics APIs and higher overall compute throughput. Its Vulkan score of 12,240 is the standout result, making it the preferred choice for Vulkan-based games and applications. The Pro 455 also delivers higher raw FP32 performance at 1,313.3 GFLOPS compared to 1,184.0 GFLOPS, along with better texture throughput at 41.04 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth advantage of 81.28 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s benefits memory-intensive workloads. The Pro 455's support for DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3 makes it the more capable card for current-generation software. The database also shows a Metal benchmark score of 15,916 for the Pro 455, indicating strong performance in Apple's Metal API ecosystem, which is relevant given its Radeon Pro Mac series generation.

The AMD Radeon R9 M275X wins in OpenCL compute tasks, as evidenced by its 11,200 score against the Pro 455's 10,336. This 7.7% advantage suggests that legacy OpenCL applications may run better on this older architecture. The R9 M275X also has a higher pixel rate at 14.80 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s, which could benefit certain rasterization-heavy workloads. Its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface provides double the bus bandwidth of the Pro 455's x8 connection, potentially improving data transfer in bandwidth-sensitive compute scenarios. For users running older software that relies on OpenCL and DirectX 11.1, the R9 M275X remains functional, though its overall performance ceiling is lower.

The broader picture favors the Pro 455 for most use cases. Its higher average benchmark score, better API support, lower power draw at 35 W, and superior transistor density make it the more balanced and forward-looking choice. The R9 M275X is a specialized option, relevant only when OpenCL performance is the sole criterion. The data shows a clear verdict: the Pro 455 is the superior all-around GPU, while the R9 M275X holds a narrow niche in legacy compute workloads.