AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 records an average benchmark score of 64,212, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT averages 45,384.

Q: How much faster is the WX 9100 in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the WX 9100 scores 66,605 against 41,772 for the 5500 XT, a delta of 59.4% in favor of the WX 9100.

Q: Are both cards based on the same architecture?

A: No. The WX 9100 uses GCN 5.0 with the Vega 10 chip, while the 5500 XT uses RDNA 1.0 with the Navi 14 chip.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The WX 9100 has 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 483.8 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 5500 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The WX 9100 sits at the 89th percentile, while the 5500 XT sits at the 84th percentile.

Q: Did the 5500 XT win any head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: No. In the recorded database comparisons across Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, the WX 9100 won all three tests.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between these two AMD professional GPUs is substantial. The Radeon Pro WX 9100 relies on the Vega 10 chip built on GCN 5.0, a 14 nm design fabricated by GlobalFoundries. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT, in contrast, uses the Navi 14 chip based on RDNA 1.0, manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. This generational shift brings a significant difference in transistor density: the WX 9100 packs 12,500 million transistors across a 495 mm² die, yielding a density of 25.3 million transistors per square millimeter. The 5500 XT integrates 6,400 million transistors on a much smaller 158 mm² die, reaching 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter.

The compute resource disparity is equally pronounced. The WX 9100 deploys 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The 5500 XT offers 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Neither card includes dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Clock behavior differs notably: the WX 9100 has a base clock of 1200 MHz and a boost clock of 1500 MHz, while the 5500 XT runs a lower base of 1187 MHz but boosts higher to 1757 MHz.

Memory architecture represents a fundamental divergence. The WX 9100 uses 16 GB of HBM2 with a 2048-bit bus and a memory clock of 945 MHz (1890 Mbps effective), resulting in 483.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The 5500 XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with a 1750 MHz memory clock (14 Gbps effective), delivering 224.0 GB/s. The WX 9100's bandwidth advantage is roughly a factor of 2.16. The 5500 XT supports PCIe 4.0 x8, whereas the WX 9100 runs on PCIe 3.0 x16.

API support also differs. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the WX 9100 lists Vulkan 1.3 while the 5500 XT lists Vulkan 1.4. The WX 9100 provides six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the 5500 XT has no display outputs. The WX 9100 is a dual-slot card with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors; the 5500 XT is an IGP form factor with no power connectors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance edge for the Radeon Pro WX 9100 across all three tested workloads. In the Geekbench Metal test, the WX 9100 scores 71,319 against the 5500 XT's 54,779, a 30.2% advantage. This is the closest margin between the two cards. The Vulkan test widens the gap: the WX 9100 posts 54,711 versus 39,601 for the 5500 XT, representing a 38.2% delta. The largest separation appears in OpenCL, where the WX 9100 reaches 66,605 while the 5500 XT manages 41,772, a 59.4% difference.

These results align with the raw compute specifications. The WX 9100's FP32 throughput of 12.29 TFLOPS more than doubles the 5500 XT's 5.398 TFLOPS. Similarly, the texture rate of 384.0 GTexel/s on the WX 9100 compares to 168.7 GTexel/s on the 5500 XT. The pixel rate of 96.00 GPixel/s versus 56.22 GPixel/s further confirms the WX 9100's fill-rate dominance.

The average benchmark score reinforces this hierarchy. The WX 9100's 64,212 average places it in the 89th percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, 0.6% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, 0.6% delta). The 5500 XT's 45,384 average sits at the 84th percentile, with nearest rivals including the Intel Arc A730M (45,592, -0.5% delta) and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972, -1.3% delta). The 5500 XT's closest rival, the Intel Arc A730M, is within half a percent, suggesting the 5500 XT sits in a tightly contested performance band.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every major specification category. The process node shifts from 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) on the WX 9100 to 7 nm (TSMC) on the 5500 XT. Transistor count drops from 12,500 million to 6,400 million, while die size shrinks from 495 mm² to 158 mm². Transistor density rises from 25.3M per mm² to 40.5M per mm².

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The base clock is slightly higher on the WX 9100 (1200 MHz versus 1187 MHz), but the boost clock favors the 5500 XT (1757 MHz versus 1500 MHz). Memory clocks differ in both frequency and effective data rate: the WX 9100 runs at 945 MHz with 1890 Mbps effective, while the 5500 XT runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity halves from 16 GB to 8 GB, and the type changes from HBM2 to GDDR6. The bus width drops from 2048 bits to 128 bits, and bandwidth falls from 483.8 GB/s to 224.0 GB/s. Shading units decrease from 4,096 to 1,536, TMUs from 256 to 96, and ROPs from 64 to 32. Pixel rate drops from 96.00 GPixel/s to 56.22 GPixel/s, and texture rate from 384.0 GTexel/s to 168.7 GTexel/s. FP32 performance falls from 12.29 TFLOPS to 5.398 TFLOPS, with FP16 (2:1) dropping from 24.58 TFLOPS to 10.80 TFLOPS.

Power requirements differ substantially. The WX 9100 has a TDP of 230 W and a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the 5500 XT has a TDP of 125 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The WX 9100 is dual-slot with two power connectors; the 5500 XT is an IGP with no connectors. The bus interface changes from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs go from six mini-DisplayPort 1.4a to none. The WX 9100 has documented dimensions of 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length and 111 mm (4.4 inches) in height, while the 5500 XT has no recorded dimensions. The WX 9100 launched on 2017-07-09 with a launch MSRP of 1,599 USD, while the 5500 XT launched on 2020-08-03 with no recorded MSRP. Both are end-of-life products. The WX 9100 lists a predecessor (Radeon Pro GCN) and successor (Radeon Pro Vega); the 5500 XT lists neither.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon Pro WX 9100 wins decisively in every recorded benchmark category. In Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan workloads, it outperforms the 5500 XT by margins ranging from 30.2% to 59.4%. The WX 9100 is the clear choice for compute-heavy tasks that stress FP32 throughput, texture fill, and memory bandwidth. Its 483.8 GB/s bandwidth and 12.29 TFLOPS FP32 make it suitable for large datasets, high-resolution rendering, and multi-display configurations with six mini-DisplayPort outputs. The 89th percentile ranking places it among the top tier of all GPUs, with nearest rivals separated by less than 1%, indicating it competes effectively with contemporary cards like the NVIDIA CMP 30HX and AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP.

The Radeon Pro 5500 XT, despite losing all head-to-head tests, has distinct advantages. Its 7 nm process yields a smaller die (158 mm²) with higher transistor density (40.5M per mm²), which translates to lower power draw: 125 W TDP versus 230 W, and a suggested PSU of 300 W versus 550 W. The IGP form factor with no power connectors and no display outputs suggests it is designed for integration into systems where space and power are constrained. Despite the lower raw performance, its 84th percentile ranking is respectable, and its nearest rivals (Intel Arc A730M, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) are all within 1.3% of its average score. The 5500 XT's higher boost clock (1757 MHz versus 1500 MHz) and support for PCIe 4.0 x8 indicate it can handle modern interface requirements efficiently.

For users prioritizing raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth, the WX 9100 is the unambiguous winner. For users needing efficient, low-power integration with modern PCIe 4.0 support and a smaller physical footprint, the 5500 XT offers a viable alternative. The data shows a clear performance hierarchy: the WX 9100 leads in all compute metrics, while the 5500 XT leads in power efficiency and process technology. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload favors absolute performance or system integration efficiency.