AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon RX 5500M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5500M and the AMD Radeon Pro 455 represent two distinct generations of AMD mobile graphics, separated by a significant architectural leap. The data shows a decisive performance gap, with the RX 5500M dominating the Pro 455 across every shared benchmark, but the comparison reveals more than just raw speed. The RX 5500M, built on RDNA 1.0, is a clear generational upgrade over the GCN 4.0-based Pro 455, offering a substantial increase in compute power, memory bandwidth, and modern API support, while the Pro 455 counters with a much lower power draw and a different physical form factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5500M wins all three head-to-head tests, with margins that indicate a complete generational shift rather than a modest improvement. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5500M scores 50,359 against the Pro 455's 15,916, a delta of 216.4%. This is not a close contest; the RX 5500M delivers more than three times the Metal performance, which directly reflects its superior shading units and texture throughput.

The gap widens further in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RX 5500M posts 38,725 versus the Pro 455's 10,336, a 274.7% advantage. This test is particularly sensitive to raw compute resources, and the data shows the RX 5500M's FP32 output of 4.632 TFLOPS is over 3.5 times the Pro 455's 1,313.3 GFLOPS. The OpenCL result is the single largest win for the RX 5500M, underscoring its suitability for compute-heavy workloads.

The Vulkan test shows a slightly narrower, but still massive, lead. The RX 5500M scores 35,693, while the Pro 455 manages 12,240, resulting in a 191.6% delta. This margin is consistent with the other results, confirming that the RX 5500M's advantage holds across diverse graphics APIs. In all three cases, the RX 5500M's victory is not marginal; it is a crushing defeat that places the two GPUs in entirely different performance tiers.

Contextualizing the average scores, the RX 5500M holds an average benchmark score of 13,356, placing it at the 54th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the AMD FirePro M6100 (13,354, 0% delta) and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13,321, 0.3% delta), showing it is positioned among comparable mid-range mobile parts. The Pro 455, with an average score of 12,831, sits at the 52nd percentile, with its nearest rival being the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12,830, 0% delta). The 525-point difference in average scores, while smaller than the Geekbench deltas, still places the RX 5500M ahead in the overall distribution.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M is significantly faster, scoring 50,359 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 455's 15,916. This represents a 216.4% performance advantage for the RX 5500M.

Q: How does the memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: The RX 5500M offers 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth using 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the Pro 455 provides 81.28 GB/s with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory. The RX 5500M's bandwidth is 142.72 GB/s higher, a direct result of the faster memory type and effective clock speeds.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a TDP of 35 W, while the AMD Radeon RX 5500M has a TDP of 85 W. The Pro 455 consumes 50 W less, making it a far more power-efficient part for thermally constrained systems.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), whereas the Pro 455 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). The RX 5500M's newer feature level indicates support for more advanced rendering features.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor count?

A: The RX 5500M has 6,400 million transistors on a 7 nm process, while the Pro 455 has 3,000 million transistors on a 14 nm process. The RX 5500M has over twice the transistor count, contributing to its higher performance.

Q: What is the form factor of the Pro 455?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is listed as an MXM Module, a standardized mobile expansion form factor. The RX 5500M's slot width is not specified, indicating a different or more integrated design.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is the primary driver of their performance disparity. The AMD Radeon RX 5500M is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, using the Navi 14 chip, and is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This modern design allows for a transistor density of 40.5M / mm², packing 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die. The RDNA architecture is a fundamental redesign from the older GCN 4.0 architecture found in the Pro 455, which uses the Baffin chip on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Pro 455's older process yields a lower transistor density of 24.4M / mm², with 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die.

The compute resources differ vastly. The RX 5500M features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). In contrast, the Pro 455 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the RX 5500M has roughly double the shading, texturing, and rasterization hardware. The FP32 compute output reflects this: the RX 5500M achieves 4.632 TFLOPS, while the Pro 455 achieves 1,313.3 GFLOPS. Furthermore, the RX 5500M supports FP16 at a 2:1 ratio, delivering 9.265 TFLOPS, whereas the Pro 455's FP16 output is identical to its FP32 at 1,313.3 GFLOPS (1:1), indicating a lack of dedicated half-precision acceleration.

Memory architecture is another clear point of divergence. The RX 5500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), which yields 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 455 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but at a lower 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), resulting in only 81.28 GB/s. This 2.75x bandwidth advantage for the RX 5500M is critical for texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering. The RX 5500M also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro 455 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8, offering double the transfer rate to the host system.

Specification Differences

The specification table shows a clear generational divide. The process node differs: the RX 5500M is on 7 nm, while the Pro 455 is on 14 nm. The chip names are also different, with the RX 5500M using Navi 14 and the Pro 455 using Baffin. The RX 5500M has a base clock of 1375 MHz, a boost clock of 1645 MHz, and a game clock of 1448 MHz, while the Pro 455 lists no base, boost, or game clocks. The memory speed also differs, with the RX 5500M at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus the Pro 455's 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity and type are different: the RX 5500M has 4 GB of GDDR6, while the Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5. The bandwidth figures are 224.0 GB/s and 81.28 GB/s, respectively. The shading units (1408 vs 768), TMUs (88 vs 48), and ROPs (32 vs 16) all favor the RX 5500M. Pixel rate and texture rate are also higher on the RX 5500M, at 52.64 GPixel/s and 144.8 GTexel/s, versus 13.68 GPixel/s and 41.04 GTexel/s on the Pro 455. The FP32 and FP16 performance are significantly higher on the RX 5500M.

The TDP differs by 50 W, with the RX 5500M rated at 85 W and the Pro 455 at 35 W. The Pro 455 is specified as an MXM Module, while the RX 5500M has no listed slot width. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 on the RX 5500M and PCIe 3.0 x8 on the Pro 455. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) for the RX 5500M and 12 (12_0) for the Pro 455, while Vulkan support is 1.4 for the RX 5500M and 1.3 for the Pro 455. The RX 5500M also has a transistor density of 40.5M / mm², compared to the Pro 455's 24.4M / mm².

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the AMD Radeon RX 5500M is the superior performer in every measurable category. Its wins in Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan are not close, with deltas ranging from 191.6% to 274.7%. For any application that prioritizes raw graphics or compute performance, the RX 5500M is the clear choice. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, higher bandwidth, and double the shading units provide a level of performance that the Pro 455 cannot approach. The RDNA 1.0 architecture and 7 nm process also provide a more modern feature set, including DirectX 12_1 and PCIe 4.0 support.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 is not without a purpose. Its 35 W TDP is less than half of the RX 5500M's 85 W, making it a far more suitable option for slim, power-constrained laptops where battery life and thermal management are paramount. The MXM Module form factor suggests it is intended for systems with a specific upgrade path. For users who need a discrete GPU for basic acceleration or light workloads in a low-power chassis, the Pro 455's efficiency is a valid trade-off against the RX 5500M's overwhelming performance advantage.

In summary, the RX 5500M is for users who demand maximum performance and can accommodate an 85 W power draw. The Pro 455 is for users who prioritize power efficiency and a standardized mobile module over speed. The benchmark data shows no scenario where the Pro 455 wins on performance, but its power profile gives it a distinct niche. The choice is between performance and efficiency, and the data clearly defines the terms of that trade-off.