AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a single direct comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 7600M and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT, and the result is decisively one-sided. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 7600M scores 63,775 points, while the Pro 5500 XT manages 41,772 points. That translates to a 52.7% advantage for the RX 7600M, a gap so large that it separates the two cards by more than just a tier of performance. The RX 7600M does not merely edge out its rival; it outperforms it by a margin that suggests a fundamentally different class of compute capability.

Looking at the broader benchmark database, the RX 7600M lands in the 89th percentile among all GPUs, while the Pro 5500 XT sits at the 84th percentile. These percentile rankings confirm that the RX 7600M is not only faster than the Pro 5500 XT but also positioned higher relative to the entire GPU landscape. The RX 7600M's average benchmark score of 63,775 places it in the company of cards like the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, a delta of -0.1%) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, -0.1%). It also edges out the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, +0.1%) while trailing the AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 (64,212, -0.7%). These are tight margins, indicating that the RX 7600M is competitive with a cluster of higher-end workstation and enthusiast cards from previous generations.

The Pro 5500 XT, by contrast, has an average score of 45,384, placing it near the Intel Arc A730M (45,592, -0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152, +0.5%). Interestingly, the Pro 5500 XT's OpenCL result of 41,772 is actually below its own average, meaning its Metal score of 54,779 and Vulkan score of 39,601 pull the average upward. This is a crucial nuance: the Pro 5500 XT performs better in Apple-centric workloads (Metal) than in cross-platform OpenCL, while the RX 7600M has only a single recorded OpenCL result. The data does not include a Metal or Vulkan score for the RX 7600M, so a direct comparison across those APIs is impossible from the recorded measurements.

The 52.7% delta in OpenCL is the headline figure, but it is worth questioning what drives such a large difference. The RX 7600M's shading unit count (1,792 versus 1,536) and texture mapping units (112 versus 96) are higher, yet the gap in raw FP32 throughput is even more pronounced. The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the Pro 5500 XT manages only 5.398 TFLOPS. That is more than a threefold difference in theoretical compute, which explains why the OpenCL benchmark outcome is so lopsided. The Pro 5500 XT's pixel rate of 56.22 GPixel/s and texture rate of 168.7 GTexel/s are both far below the RX 7600M's 154.2 GPixel/s and 269.9 GTexel/s, respectively. These specification gaps align with the benchmark result, reinforcing that the RX 7600M is the stronger compute and rasterization part in every measurable category.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 7600M than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 7600M scores 63,775 points, while the Pro 5500 XT scores 41,772 points. This gives the RX 7600M a 52.7% lead in that specific test.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database?

A: The RX 7600M ranks in the 89th percentile, while the Pro 5500 XT ranks in the 84th percentile. The RX 7600M is therefore positioned higher relative to the entire database of tested GPUs.

Q: Does the Pro 5500 XT have any benchmark scores that are higher than its OpenCL result?

A: Yes. The Pro 5500 XT records a Geekbench Metal score of 54,779 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 39,601. Its OpenCL score of 41,772 is lower than its Metal score, indicating a stronger showing in Apple's Metal API.

Q: What are the nearest rivals to the RX 7600M in terms of average benchmark score?

A: The closest competitors are the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, -0.1%), the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, -0.1%), and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, +0.1%). The AMD Radeon Pro WX 9100 is slightly ahead at 64,212 (-0.7%).

Q: What is the nearest rival to the Pro 5500 XT by average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A730M (45,592, -0.5%) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152, +0.5%) are the closest. The NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972, -1.3%) and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (44,795, +1.3%) also bracket its score.

Q: Does the RX 7600M have any recorded benchmark results besides Geekbench OpenCL?

A: No. The database lists only a single Geekbench OpenCL score for the RX 7600M. There are no Metal or Vulkan results recorded for this GPU.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 7600M is the superior GPU for general compute workloads, as measured by Geekbench OpenCL. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 52.7%, and its percentile ranking (89th versus 84th) reinforces its higher standing. Anyone seeking raw OpenCL performance should choose the RX 7600M without hesitation.

However, the Pro 5500 XT is not without merit. Its Metal score of 54,779 is substantially higher than its OpenCL score of 41,772, suggesting that it is optimized for Apple's ecosystem. The RX 7600M has no recorded Metal result, so it is impossible to say whether it would match or exceed that number. For users who rely on Metal-accelerated applications, the Pro 5500 XT may still be a viable option, especially given its end-of-life status makes it available in existing Mac systems.

The Pro 5500 XT also has a lower pixel rate (56.22 GPixel/s versus 154.2 GPixel/s) and texture rate (168.7 GTexel/s versus 269.9 GTexel/s), meaning it is not competitive for rasterization-heavy tasks. Its FP32 throughput of 5.398 TFLOPS is only about 31% of the RX 7600M's 17.27 TFLOPS. The verdict is straightforward: the RX 7600M is the faster card in every recorded metric, and the Pro 5500 XT only makes sense in a context where Metal performance is the primary concern and the OpenCL gap is acceptable.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs diverge on nearly every core specification. The RX 7600M is built on the Navi 33 chip using RDNA 3.0 architecture, while the Pro 5500 XT uses Navi 14 with RDNA 1.0. The process nodes differ: the RX 7600M uses TSMC's 6 nm process, whereas the Pro 5500 XT uses TSMC's 7 nm process. Transistor counts are starkly different, with the RX 7600M packing 13,300 million transistors on a 204 mm² die, versus 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die for the Pro 5500 XT. This results in a transistor density of 65.2M per mm² for the RX 7600M and 40.5M per mm² for the Pro 5500 XT.

Clock speeds also favor the RX 7600M. Its base clock is 1500 MHz, boost clock is 2410 MHz, and game clock is 2070 MHz. The Pro 5500 XT has a base clock of 1187 MHz and a boost clock of 1757 MHz, with no game clock listed. Memory clocks differ as well: the RX 7600M runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective, while the Pro 5500 XT runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 7600M achieves 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth versus 224.0 GB/s for the Pro 5500 XT.

The RX 7600M has 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Pro 5500 XT has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores listed. Pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute all follow the same pattern: the RX 7600M leads with 154.2 GPixel/s, 269.9 GTexel/s, and 17.27 TFLOPS, versus 56.22 GPixel/s, 168.7 GTexel/s, and 5.398 TFLOPS. FP16 performance shows the RX 7600M at 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) and the Pro 5500 XT at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power and interface details differ as well. The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W, while the Pro 5500 XT has a TDP of 125 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors. The bus interface differs: the RX 7600M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the Pro 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent" for the RX 7600M and "No outputs" for the Pro 5500 XT. The RX 7600M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is generational. The RX 7600M belongs to the Radeon RX 7000 series and is based on RDNA 3.0, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." Its generation is listed as Navi Mobile (RX 7000M). The Pro 5500 XT is based on RDNA 1.0 and belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series) generation. This means the RX 7600M benefits from a newer architecture that introduces ray tracing cores (28 of them), a feature entirely absent from the Pro 5500 XT's specification list.

The process node difference is significant: 6 nm versus 7 nm, both from TSMC. This allows the RX 7600M to pack more than double the transistors (13,300 million versus 6,400 million) into a die that is only 46 mm² larger. The transistor density improvement, 65.2M per mm² versus 40.5M per mm², reflects the architectural and manufacturing advances of RDNA 3.0 over RDNA 1.0.

The RX 7600M's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the Pro 5500 XT's DirectX 12 (12_1) indicates a difference in feature level, including hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders. The Pro 5500 XT lacks any ray tracing cores, which is consistent with its older architecture. Both cards support Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6, so API coverage is otherwise similar.

The Pro 5500 XT's release date is 2020-08-03, while the RX 7600M's is 2023-01-03. The RX 7600M is listed as "Active" in production status, while the Pro 5500 XT is "End-of-life." The RX 7600M's predecessor is listed as "Polaris Mobile," while the Pro 5500 XT has no predecessor or successor listed. These differences paint a picture of a modern, actively supported GPU versus a legacy part that has been phased out.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600M wins in every recorded benchmark and every measured specification. It is faster in OpenCL by 52.7%, has a higher percentile ranking, more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher clocks, more memory bandwidth, and significantly higher compute throughput. It also supports ray tracing, which the Pro 5500 XT does not. For any workload that relies on OpenCL, FP32 compute, or rasterization, the RX 7600M is the clear choice.

The Pro 5500 XT's only notable strength is its Metal performance. Its Geekbench Metal score of 54,779 is 31% higher than its OpenCL score, suggesting that it is well-tuned for Apple's GPU API. The RX 7600M has no Metal result in the database, so it is possible that the Pro 5500 XT could outperform it in Metal-specific applications, but there is no data to confirm or deny this. Additionally, the Pro 5500 XT has a lower TDP of 125 W compared to the RX 7600M's 90 W, which is counterintuitive: the Pro 5500 XT consumes more power while delivering less performance. This makes the RX 7600M the more power-efficient option as well.

In practical terms, the RX 7600M is the winner for gaming, compute, and general GPU workloads. The Pro 5500 XT is only relevant in legacy Mac systems where Metal is the primary API and where its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory is sufficient. The data does not support any other use case for the Pro 5500 XT over the RX 7600M.