AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile Comparison

AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT and NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile occupy different corners of the GPU landscape, one a Mac-oriented professional part from 2020, the other a current high-end laptop chip. The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap, with the NVIDIA part winning both shared tests by wide margins, yet the AMD part holds a slightly higher overall percentile ranking against all GPUs. This creates an interesting split between raw compute wins and broader database standing.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 159575 against 41772 for the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT, a delta of 73.8 percent in NVIDIA's favor. In Geekbench Vulkan, the NVIDIA card scores 145807 versus 39601, a 72.8 percent advantage. These are not narrow victories; the RTX 4080 Mobile more than triples the AMD part's output in both compute APIs. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT, for its part, wins no shared benchmark in the comparison, but it does achieve a higher percentile ranking of 84 compared to 81 for the NVIDIA part, and its average benchmark score of 45384 is higher than the NVIDIA card's 38135 average.

The use-case split is therefore clear. The RTX 4080 Mobile is the compute leader in every measured workload, with particularly strong results in OpenCL and Vulkan. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT, despite losing both direct comparisons, sits at a better percentile versus all GPUs, meaning its overall database profile is competitive with a different set of hardware. The AMD part's nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A730M at 45592 (0.5 percent difference) and the RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45972 (1.3 percent difference), while the NVIDIA Mobile card's nearest rivals are the GeForce MX570 at 38299 (0.4 percent difference) and the GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile at 38349 (0.6 percent difference).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural families. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile uses the AD104 chip based on Ada Lovelace, fabricated on TSMC's 5 nm process. It contains 35,800 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, for a density of 121.8M per mm². The NVIDIA chip has more than five times the transistor count and nearly double the die area, with roughly three times the transistor density.

The compute resources differ by an order of magnitude. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT has 1536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX 4080 Mobile has 7424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 58 ray tracing cores and 232 tensor cores, features entirely absent from the Radeon's specification sheet. In terms of API support, the AMD card lists DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The NVIDIA card lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, adding the feature set of DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Memory architecture also diverges. The AMD part uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA part uses 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192 bit bus, delivering 432.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has 50 percent more memory capacity and nearly double the bandwidth. Clock behavior shows a different profile: the Radeon has a base clock of 1187 MHz and a boost of 1757 MHz, while the RTX 4080 Mobile has a higher base of 1290 MHz but a lower boost of 1665 MHz. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for AMD versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between these cards. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 159575, which is 73.8 percent higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT's 41772. This is the larger of the two gaps. In Geekbench Vulkan, the NVIDIA card scores 145807 against 39601, a 72.8 percent advantage. Both tests show the NVIDIA part performing at roughly 3.7 times the level of the AMD part.

The compute throughput numbers explain why. The RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 5.398 TFLOPS for the Radeon Pro 5500 XT. That is a 4.6 to 1 ratio in raw shader math. Pixel rate is 133.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA versus 56.22 GPixel/s for AMD, a 2.4 to 1 advantage. Texture rate is 386.3 GTexel/s versus 168.7 GTexel/s, a 2.3 to 1 lead. The FP16 comparison is interesting: the AMD card lists 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA card lists 24.72 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), meaning NVIDIA maintains full rate for FP16 while AMD halves its rate.

The average benchmark scores in the database tell a slightly different story. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has an average benchmark score of 45384, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile has an average of 38135. This is because the AMD part's benchmark suite includes Geekbench Metal, where it scores 54779, a test not present in the NVIDIA card's recorded results. The NVIDIA card's suite includes PassMark tests across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute, which pull its average down relative to the AMD part's more focused set of three Geekbench tests.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification field. Process node: AMD uses 7 nm, NVIDIA uses 5 nm. Transistors: 6,400 million versus 35,800 million. Die size: 158 mm² versus 294 mm². Transistor density: 40.5M per mm² versus 121.8M per mm². Base clock: 1187 MHz versus 1290 MHz. Boost clock: 1757 MHz versus 1665 MHz. Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). Memory size: 8 GB versus 12 GB. Bus width: 128 bit versus 192 bit. Bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 432.0 GB/s.

Shading units: 1536 versus 7424. TMUs: 96 versus 232. ROPs: 32 versus 80. RT cores: absent versus 58. Tensor cores: absent versus 232. Pixel rate: 56.22 GPixel/s versus 133.2 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 168.7 GTexel/s versus 386.3 GTexel/s. FP32: 5.398 TFLOPS versus 24.72 TFLOPS. FP16: 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 24.72 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP: 125 W versus 110 W. Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16. Display outputs: no outputs versus portable device dependent. DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Production status: the AMD part is end-of-life, the NVIDIA part is active. Release dates: 2020-08-03 for AMD, 2023-01-02 for NVIDIA. The NVIDIA part has a predecessor (GeForce 30 Mobile) and successor (GeForce 50 Mobile) recorded; the AMD part lists neither. The AMD part belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series) generation, while the NVIDIA part belongs to GeForce 40 Mobile. Neither card has a launch MSRP in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has an average benchmark score of 45384, which is higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile's average of 38135.

Q: How large is the NVIDIA card's lead in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile scores 159575 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 73.8 percent higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT's score of 41772.

Q: Does the AMD card have any ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT lists no RT cores and no tensor cores, whereas the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile includes 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores.

Q: Which GPU has the larger memory bus and higher bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile has a 192 bit bus and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT's 128 bit bus and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the FP32 performance difference between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile delivers 24.72 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT delivers 5.398 TFLOPS, a difference of roughly 4.6 times in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: Which GPU has the higher TDP rating?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has a TDP of 125 W, which is higher than the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Mobile's TDP of 110 W, despite the NVIDIA card's significantly higher compute performance.