AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon RX 580 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 580 and AMD Radeon Pro 455 represent two very different interpretations of the same GCN 4.0 architecture. The RX 580 is a desktop powerhouse designed for maximum throughput, while the Pro 455 is a mobile module optimized for efficiency in a Mac laptop. The benchmark data confirms this split decisively: the RX 580 wins all three head-to-head comparisons, with margins that range from substantial to overwhelming. The average benchmark scores are deceptively close—12928 for the RX 580 versus 12831 for the Pro 455—but this is an artifact of the limited test set available for the Pro 455, which only has three recorded benchmarks. When the same workloads are run on both cards, the RX 580's advantages in raw compute and memory bandwidth become unmistakable.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result appears in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the RX 580 scores 45173 against the Pro 455's 12240. That is a 269.1% advantage, meaning the RX 580 delivers roughly 3.7 times the Vulkan performance of the Pro 455. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and reflects the fundamental gap in shading units—2304 versus 768—as well as the RX 580's wider memory interface.

The Geekbench OpenCL result tells a similar story, though the margin narrows slightly. The RX 580 posts 37453, while the Pro 455 manages 10336, a 262.4% difference. OpenCL workloads scale heavily with compute unit count and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the RX 580. The Pro 455's 81.28 GB/s bandwidth is less than a third of the RX 580's 256.0 GB/s, and this bottleneck shows up directly in compute-heavy tasks.

The closest head-to-head result is Geekbench Metal, where the RX 580 achieves 45235 and the Pro 455 scores 15916. The 184.2% delta is still a dominant victory, but it is the smallest of the three. Metal is Apple's graphics API, and the Pro 455 is specifically designed for Mac systems, so its relative strength here is not surprising. Even so, the RX 580's superior pixel rate (42.88 GPixel/s versus 13.68 GPixel/s) and texture rate (193.0 GTexel/s versus 41.04 GTexel/s) prove too much to overcome.

It is notably the RX 580 has no recorded Passmark or 3DMark scores in this dataset, so the comparison relies entirely on the three Geekbench tests. The Pro 455's average benchmark score of 12831 is heavily influenced by its nearest rivals—the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 sits at 12830 with a 0% delta, and the AMD FirePro W5100 is at 12847 with a -0.1% delta. This places the Pro 455 in a performance tier that is competitive with decade-old desktop flagships, but the RX 580 sits in a similar tier according to its own nearest rivals (RTX 3050 Ti Mobile at 12940 with -0.1% delta). The head-to-head tests strip away this ambiguity: on identical workloads, the RX 580 is in a completely different class.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 580 wins all three head-to-head benchmarks against the AMD Radeon Pro 455. The wins come in Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan, giving the RX 580 a 3–0 record in this comparison.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 580 scores 45173 versus the Pro 455's 12240, a 269.1% difference. The smallest gap is in Geekbench Metal, with the RX 580 leading by 184.2% (45235 versus 15916).

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 580 has an average benchmark score of 12928, while the Pro 455 averages 12831. This difference is only 0.8%, but it is misleading because the Pro 455 only has three benchmark results, all from Geekbench, whereas the RX 580 has eleven results across multiple test suites.

Q: Does the Pro 455 have any performance advantage?

A: In the provided data, the Pro 455 does not win any benchmark. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (0% delta) and AMD FirePro W5100 (-0.1% delta), suggesting it is competitive with those cards, but it trails the RX 580 in every direct comparison.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each card?

A: The RX 580 ranks in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 455 ranks in the 52nd percentile. Despite the massive head-to-head deltas, both cards sit near the middle of the overall GPU performance distribution.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use GCN 4.0 architecture and are manufactured on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The RX 580 uses the Polaris 20 chip, while the Pro 455 uses the Baffin chip.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 580 is the clear choice for any application that demands raw graphics throughput. Its 6.175 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the Pro 455's 1,313.3 GFLOPS, making it suitable for high-resolution gaming, 3D rendering, and GPU-accelerated compute. The 8 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus provides 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is essential for large textures and complex scenes. In the head-to-head tests, it delivers over 2.6 times the OpenCL performance of the Pro 455, confirming its strength in general-purpose compute workloads.

The Pro 455's advantages are more circumstantial. It is a 35 W MXM Module with no power connectors, designed for portable devices where space and thermal limits are critical. Its 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus is modest, but it is paired with a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, which is sufficient for its intended role. The Pro 455 also has a higher transistor density (24.4M / mm²) than the RX 580 (24.6M / mm²) when accounting for die size, though the difference is negligible. In practice, the Pro 455 is a competent card for light to moderate graphics work in a Mac laptop, but it cannot match the RX 580 in any benchmark metric recorded here.

For users who need a desktop card with end-of-life production status and a 185 W TDP, the RX 580 offers a compelling performance profile. For those who need a low-power mobile solution, the Pro 455's 35 W TDP and MXM form factor make it a practical choice, but they come at the cost of 78% fewer shading units and a 68% narrower memory bus.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification gap is memory. The RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 455 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 81.28 GB/s. This is a 3.15x difference in bandwidth, which directly impacts texture-heavy workloads and high-resolution rendering.

Shader resources are equally divergent. The RX 580 packs 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Pro 455 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This translates to a pixel rate of 42.88 GPixel/s for the RX 580 versus 13.68 GPixel/s for the Pro 455, and a texture rate of 193.0 GTexel/s versus 41.04 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds also differ, though the Pro 455's core clocks are not listed in the data. The RX 580 runs at 1257 MHz base and 1340 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the RX 580 and 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) for the Pro 455. The power envelope is another major divider: the RX 580 draws 185 W and requires a 1x 8-pin power connector with a 450 W suggested PSU, while the Pro 455 draws just 35 W and needs no external power connectors.

Physical dimensions and interfaces differ as well. The RX 580 is a dual-slot card measuring 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length, using PCIe 3.0 x16. The Pro 455 is an MXM Module with no listed dimensions, using PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are also distinct: the RX 580 offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the Pro 455's outputs are described as "Portable Device Dependent."

Architecture Differences

Both cards share the GCN 4.0 architecture and are built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but they use different chips. The RX 580 uses Polaris 20, a large die measuring 232 mm² with 5,700 million transistors. The Pro 455 uses Baffin, a smaller die at 123 mm² with 3,000 million transistors. The transistor densities are nearly identical—24.6M / mm² for the RX 580 and 24.4M / mm² for the Pro 455—indicating the same manufacturing process and design philosophy.

The architectural lineage is also different. The RX 580 belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation and lists Arctic Islands as its predecessor and Vega as its successor. The Pro 455 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) generation and has no predecessor or successor listed. This reflects their different market positions: the RX 580 is a mainstream consumer card, while the Pro 455 is a niche mobile workstation part.

Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, so API compatibility is identical. Neither has ray tracing cores or tensor cores, which is consistent with the GCN 4.0 architecture. The FP16 performance matches FP32 for both cards (6.175 TFLOPS for the RX 580 and 1,313.3 GFLOPS for the Pro 455), indicating a 1:1 ratio rather than the accelerated FP16 paths found in newer architectures.

The release dates are about six months apart—the RX 580 launched on April 17, 2017, while the Pro 455 launched on October 29, 2016. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 580 has a documented launch MSRP of 229 USD, while the Pro 455 has no launch MSRP listed. The RX 580's success in the head-to-head tests is a function of its larger chip, wider memory interface, and higher clock speeds—all of which stem from its desktop-oriented design versus the Pro 455's mobile efficiency focus.