AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 wins every recorded benchmark in the database comparison. The Vega 48 takes all three head-to-head tests: Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT does not secure a single win in any measured workload. This is a decisive sweep, but the margin varies sharply by API.

The biggest gap appears in Vulkan compute. The Vega 48 scores 57653 against 39601 for the 5500 XT, a 45.6% advantage. That is a substantial lead for workloads that route through Vulkan. OpenCL shows a 28.7% gap (53757 vs 41772), while Metal is the closest contest at 26% (69010 vs 54779). Even the smallest margin remains a clear victory for the older, larger chip.

The average benchmark score tells the same story. The Vega 48 sits at 60140, while the 5500 XT lands at 45384. That is a 32.5% gap in aggregate performance. The percentile rankings also separate the two: the Vega 48 sits at the 88th percentile of all GPUs, while the 5500 XT sits at the 84th. Neither is a low-end part, but the Vega 48 occupies a higher tier in the database's distribution.

In terms of nearest rivals, the Vega 48 sits within 2.8% of the AMD Radeon PRO V710 and NVIDIA P102-100, and within 0.3% of the Intel Arc Pro A60 and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090. The 5500 XT, by contrast, is clustered around the Intel Arc A730M (within 0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (within 0.5%), the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (within 1.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (within 1.3%). The Vega 48 competes with desktop-class accelerators, while the 5500 XT sits alongside mobile and mid-range parts.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip, built on GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip, built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a 7 nm process. The process shrink gives the 5500 XT a significant density advantage: 40.5M transistors per mm² versus 25.3M per mm².

The chip sizes differ substantially. The Vega 10 die measures 495 mm² and packs 12,500 million transistors. The Navi 14 die measures 158 mm² and packs 6,400 million transistors. The Vega 10 is roughly three times larger in die area and carries nearly twice the transistor count. Despite that, the 5500 XT achieves higher transistor density due to the newer process.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The 5500 XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The Vega 48's memory bandwidth is 79.6% higher, which helps explain its compute advantage in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The memory clock rates also differ: the Vega 48 runs at 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), while the 5500 XT runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GDDR6 clock is much higher, but the narrower bus limits total throughput.

Compute resource counts favor the Vega 48 across the board. The Vega 48 has 3072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The 5500 XT has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. In every category, the Vega 48 has exactly double the resources. This doubling shows up in the raw throughput figures: the Vega 48 delivers 7.373 TFLOPS FP32 versus 5.398 TFLOPS for the 5500 XT, a 36.6% lead. Pixel rate is 76.80 GPixel/s versus 56.22 GPixel/s, a 36.6% lead. Texture rate is 230.4 GTexel/s versus 168.7 GTexel/s, a 36.6% lead.

The Vega 48 also carries a higher FP16 rating at 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) for the 5500 XT. Neither GPU has dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores. The interface differs as well: the Vega 48 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The newer interface offers more bandwidth per lane, but the Vega 48's larger x16 connection may still be preferred in some systems.

The power profile is not fully comparable. The 5500 XT lists a TDP of 125 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The Vega 48 has no TDP or PSU rating in the database. Both are integrated GPU parts (IGP slot width) with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent or no display outputs. The Vega 48 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the 5500 XT supports Vulkan 1.4. Both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 delivers 402.4 GB/s over a 2048-bit HBM2 interface. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT delivers 224.0 GB/s over a 128-bit GDDR6 interface.

Q: How much faster is the Vega 48 in Metal benchmarks?

A: The Vega 48 scores 69010 in Geekbench Metal, while the 5500 XT scores 54779. That is a 26% advantage for the Vega 48.

Q: Do either of these GPUs support ray tracing hardware?

A: No. Neither the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 nor the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT lists ray tracing cores or tensor cores in the database.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Vega 48 is built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process, while the 5500 XT is built on TSMC's 7 nm process. The 5500 XT achieves a transistor density of 40.5M per mm² versus 25.3M per mm² for the Vega 48.

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Vega 48 has an average benchmark score of 60140, placing it at the 88th percentile of all GPUs. The 5500 XT has an average score of 45384, placing it at the 84th percentile.

Q: What is the Vulkan API support difference?

A: The Vega 48 supports Vulkan 1.3, while the 5500 XT supports Vulkan 1.4. The newer API version is on the 5500 XT, despite its lower raw performance.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 | AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT |

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

| Chip | Vega 10 | Navi 14 |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

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

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 6,400 million |

| Die size | 495 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor density | 25.3M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base clock | Not listed | 1187 MHz |

| Boost clock | Not listed | 1757 MHz |

| Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 2048 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Memory clock | 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Shading units | 3072 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 192 | 96 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Pixel rate | 76.80 GPixel/s | 56.22 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 230.4 GTexel/s | 168.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 7.373 TFLOPS | 5.398 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1) | 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | Not listed | 125 W |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 300 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Vulkan version | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release date | 2019-03-18 | 2020-08-03 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records three direct comparisons between these GPUs. The Vega 48 wins all three, but the margins are not uniform. The Vulkan test shows the widest spread. The Vega 48 scores 57653, while the 5500 XT scores 39601. That 45.6% delta is the largest single gap in the comparison. This suggests the Vega 48's larger compute resource pool and wider memory bus translate especially well into Vulkan compute workloads.

The OpenCL test is closer but still one-sided. The Vega 48 scores 53757, and the 5500 XT scores 41772. The 28.7% margin reflects the same underlying resource advantage, though OpenCL appears to narrow the gap slightly compared to Vulkan. The Metal test is the tightest of the three. The Vega 48 scores 69010, and the 5500 XT scores 54779. The 26% delta is still a commanding win, but it is the smallest relative difference in the set.

Looking at the average benchmark scores reinforces the pattern. The Vega 48's 60140 average is 32.5% above the 5500 XT's 45384. The nearest rival data places each GPU in different competitive tiers. The Vega 48's closest rivals include the Intel Arc Pro A60 (60326, delta -0.3%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 (60347, delta -0.3%), the AMD Radeon PRO V710 (58657, delta 2.5%), and the NVIDIA P102-100 (58528, delta 2.8%). The 5500 XT's nearest rivals are the Intel Arc A730M (45592, delta -0.5%), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45152, delta 0.5%), the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45972, delta -1.3%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (44795, delta 1.3%).

The Vega 48's score sits within a fraction of a percent of the RTX 4090 in the database's aggregate ranking. That is a remarkable placement for a GPU that is end-of-life and was released in March 2019. The 5500 XT, released in August 2020, sits in a lower tier despite being newer. The release date difference does not translate into a performance advantage for the newer part.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 is the faster GPU in every recorded workload. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average score, and occupies a higher percentile ranking. Anyone choosing between these two for raw compute performance should select the Vega 48 without hesitation.

The 5500 XT does have advantages, but they are not performance advantages. It uses a much smaller die (158 mm² versus 495 mm²), a newer process node (7 nm versus 14 nm), and a newer architecture (RDNA 1.0 versus GCN 5.0). It also lists a TDP of 125 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, which the Vega 48 does not provide. If power efficiency is the priority, the 5500 XT's smaller, denser chip is likely the more sensible choice, though the database does not provide direct wattage measurements for the Vega 48.

For compute-heavy tasks using Metal, OpenCL, or Vulkan, the Vega 48 is the stronger pick. Its 2048-bit HBM2 memory bus and doubled shading units, TMUs, and ROPs give it a structural advantage that the 5500 XT cannot overcome despite its higher clocks. The 5500 XT's 1757 MHz boost clock and faster memory clock (1750 MHz versus 786 MHz) do not compensate for the Vega 48's wider bus and larger resource pool.

The release dates also matter. The Vega 48 launched in March 2019 and the 5500 XT in August 2020. The newer part still loses decisively. This is a case where architectural efficiency and process improvements did not translate into benchmark superiority. The Vega 48's end-of-life status does not diminish its measured performance.

In summary: choose the Vega 48 for maximum compute throughput and benchmark scores. Choose the 5500 XT if the smaller die, newer architecture, or listed power figures matter more than raw performance. The database's recorded data gives no reason to prefer the 5500 XT on speed.