AMD Radeon Pro 455 vs AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 455 and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT represent two very different eras and purposes within AMD’s lineup. The Pro 455 is a 14 nm GCN 4.0 part from 2016, designed as a mobile workstation solution, while the RX 6500 XT is a 6 nm RDNA 2.0 desktop card from 2022 aimed at mainstream gaming. The benchmark data shows a decisive generational shift, with the RX 6500 XT dominating in raw compute, yet the Pro 455 holds a distinct niche in its specific mobile form factor and legacy API support.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture: the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is the unequivocal performance winner in the two shared benchmark tests, taking both head-to-head matchups. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 48,289 versus the Pro 455’s 10,336, a staggering 78.6% lead. Similarly, in Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6500 XT posts 54,724 against 12,240, a 77.6% advantage. These are not marginal gains; they represent a fundamental architectural leap that makes the RX 6500 XT roughly four times faster in compute workloads.

However, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 is not without its own territory. Its advantage lies not in speed but in its form factor and power profile. As an MXM Module with a 35 W TDP and no power connectors, it is designed for portable devices where the RX 6500 XT’s dual-slot, 107 W, 1x 6-pin configuration would be physically impossible. The Pro 455 is the only option for specific Apple Mac applications (given its "Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series)" generation), making it the sole choice for those legacy systems, regardless of the RX 6500 XT’s superior numbers.

In terms of API support, the Pro 455 lists Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0), while the RX 6500 XT offers Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). While the RX 6500 XT supports modern ray tracing features via its 16 RT cores, the Pro 455’s older GCN architecture may have different driver optimizations for legacy software. The data does not include direct legacy benchmark comparisons, but the Pro 455’s pixel rate of 13.68 GPixel/s and texture rate of 41.04 GTexel/s, while far lower than the RX 6500 XT’s 90.08 GPixel/s and 180.2 GTexel/s, might still be sufficient for basic 2D output in its target mobile workstations.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is significantly faster, scoring 54,724 compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 455’s 12,240. This represents a 77.6% delta in favor of the RX 6500 XT.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, yielding 81.28 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 143.9 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro 455 support ray tracing?

A: No. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has no RT cores listed in its specifications. In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT includes 16 RT cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a 35 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT has a 107 W TDP and requires a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W PSU.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is built on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries, while the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is built on a 6 nm process by TSMC.

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 455 has a higher average benchmark score of 12,831 compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT’s 11,842, despite losing the head-to-head tests. This is because the Pro 455’s average is based on its three Geekbench scores, while the RX 6500 XT’s average includes lower DirectX and PassMark scores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, stemming from a six-year evolution in design philosophy. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the Baffin chip manufactured on a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 24.4M / mm². Its configuration includes 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with a boost clock that is not specified in the data.

In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is based on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, utilizing the Navi 24 chip built on TSMC’s 6 nm process. It crams 5,400 million transistors into a smaller 107 mm² die, achieving a much higher density of 50.5M / mm². The RX 6500 XT features 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, alongside 16 dedicated RT cores. Its clock speeds are dramatically higher, with a base of 2310 MHz, a game clock of 2610 MHz, and a boost of 2815 MHz, compared to the Pro 455’s unspecified clocks.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The Pro 455 uses a 128-bit bus with 2 GB GDDR5, while the RX 6500 XT uses a narrower 64-bit bus but compensates with faster GDDR6 memory, achieving higher bandwidth (143.9 GB/s vs 81.28 GB/s). The FP32 compute figures illustrate the scale of difference: the Pro 455 delivers 1,313.3 GFLOPS with 1:1 FP16, while the RX 6500 XT delivers 5.765 TFLOPS FP32 and 11.53 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The RX 6500 XT also supports PCIe 4.0 x4, whereas the Pro 455 is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs share only two benchmark tests in the data, and the results are entirely one-sided. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT scores 48,289, obliterating the AMD Radeon Pro 455’s 10,336. The delta percentage of -78.6% indicates the Pro 455 is trailing by that margin, meaning the RX 6500 XT is approximately 4.7 times faster in this compute workload. This test measures general-purpose GPU compute, and the RX 6500 XT’s newer architecture, higher clocks, and 4 GB of faster memory clearly dominate.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a similar pattern. The RX 6500 XT scores 54,724 versus the Pro 455’s 12,240, a delta of -77.6%. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics and compute API, and the RDNA 2.0 architecture’s superior geometry processing and shader efficiency are evident. The RX 6500 XT’s victory is not just in raw numbers but also in architectural efficiency, as it achieves these scores with half the memory bus width (64-bit vs 128-bit).

It is worth remembering the AMD Radeon Pro 455 has no wins in the head-to-head benchmarks, with a total of 0 wins against the RX 6500 XT’s 2 wins. However, the Pro 455’s average benchmark score of 12,831 is actually higher than the RX 6500 XT’s 11,842. This is because the Pro 455’s average is computed from its three Geekbench scores (15,916 Metal, 10,336 OpenCL, 12,240 Vulkan), all of which are relatively close. The RX 6500 XT’s average is dragged down by its low PassMark DirectX scores (60 for DX10, 90 for DX11, 38 for DX12, 108 for DX9) and its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 235, despite having a strong PassMark G3D score of 9,608.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs is not really a choice for most users; it is dictated entirely by the system they are building or upgrading. The AMD Radeon Pro 455 is an end-of-life MXM module with a 35 W TDP, designed exclusively for portable devices, particularly older Apple Mac systems from the Radeon Pro Mac generation. Its 2 GB GDDR5 memory and GCN 4.0 architecture are outdated, and its performance is a fraction of the RX 6500 XT’s. However, for anyone with a compatible Mac or other MXM-based portable workstation, it is the only drop-in option that fits the slot and power envelope.

The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT, while also end-of-life, is a vastly more capable desktop card. It offers 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, 16 RT cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and a launch MSRP of 199 USD. Its performance in OpenCL and Vulkan is nearly 4-5 times higher than the Pro 455, making it suitable for modern 1080p gaming and entry-level content creation. The data shows it sits near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 in average score (11,842 vs 11,960, a -1% delta), which contextualizes its performance level.

For a desktop user, the RX 6500 XT is the only logical choice, despite its low PassMark DirectX 12 score of 38, which suggests driver overhead or architectural quirks in certain legacy tests. For a laptop or Mac user with a specific MXM slot, the Pro 455 is the only option that fits, regardless of its performance deficits. The verdict is simple: if it fits in your machine, the RX 6500 XT wins on every measurable benchmark metric; if it does not fit, the Pro 455 is a capable, low-power solution for its intended niche.