AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT and NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB represent two very different eras of professional GPU design, and the benchmark data reflects that divide clearly. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT edges out a narrow win in OpenCL compute, while the Quadro M6000 delivers a decisive victory in Vulkan performance. Neither card dominates the other outright, and the choice between them hinges on which workload you prioritize and how you weigh architectural efficiency against raw memory capacity.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards split their head-to-head matchups, with each taking one benchmark win. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT scores 41,772, beating the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 40,098 by a margin of 4.2%. This is a modest but real advantage for the AMD card in general-purpose compute workloads that leverage OpenCL. The 4.2% delta is not a landslide, but it does indicate that the newer RDNA 1.0 architecture extracts more performance from its smaller transistor count and newer process node in this specific API.

The Vulkan results tell a completely different story. Here, the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 46,425, versus the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT’s 39,601. That is a 14.7% advantage for the NVIDIA card, a substantial gap that flips the overall head-to-head narrative. The Quadro’s Vulkan win is significant enough that any workload built on that API will clearly favor the older Maxwell 2.0 architecture, despite its larger 28 nm process and lower clock speeds.

Looking at the broader benchmark averages, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT holds an average benchmark score of 45,384, which places it in the 84th percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has an average score of 43,262, landing in the 83rd percentile. The overall average delta is roughly 4.9% in favor of the AMD card, but this aggregate figure masks the fact that the Vulkan test heavily favors NVIDIA while OpenCL slightly favors AMD. When comparing to their nearest rivals, the AMD card sits within 1.3% of the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation and 1.3% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, while the Quadro M6000 is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile at a 0% delta. The data suggests these two cards are competitive in their respective performance tiers, but the distribution of wins is uneven across APIs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is wide, and it explains most of the benchmark behavior. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This is a modern, power-efficient design with 6,400 million transistors packed into a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB, by contrast, uses the GM200 chip on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. It carries 8,000 million transistors across a massive 601 mm² die, but its transistor density is only 13.3M per mm². The AMD part is roughly three times denser, which reflects the generational leap in manufacturing technology.

Clock speeds also favor the AMD card. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT runs at a base clock of 1187 MHz and boosts to 1757 MHz, while the Quadro M6000 is limited to 988 MHz base and 1114 MHz boost. The AMD card’s memory is rated at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on GDDR6, whereas the NVIDIA card uses 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) on GDDR5. Despite the Quadro’s lower clocks, it has a wider 384-bit memory bus versus the AMD card’s 128-bit bus, giving the NVIDIA card a 317.4 GB/s bandwidth advantage over the AMD card’s 224.0 GB/s.

The compute resources are lopsided in the other direction. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro’s pixel rate is 106.9 GPixel/s and texture rate is 213.9 GTexel/s, versus 56.22 GPixel/s and 168.7 GTexel/s for the AMD card. In raw FP32 throughput, the NVIDIA card outputs 6.844 TFLOPS, ahead of the AMD card’s 5.398 TFLOPS. The AMD card does support FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1), while the NVIDIA card has no FP16 capability listed. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is not a differentiator.

The physical and power profiles diverge sharply. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has a 125 W TDP, is an IGP slot width with no power connectors, and requires a 300 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has a 250 W TDP, is a dual-slot card with a single 8-pin power connector, and requires a 600 W suggested PSU. The NVIDIA card also has physical dimensions of 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, while the AMD card lists no dimensions. The NVIDIA card includes display outputs (1x DVI, 4x DisplayPort 1.2), whereas the AMD card has no outputs at all, indicating it is meant for compute-only or integrated use cases.

The Verdict

From the data, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT is the better choice for OpenCL-based compute workloads and for anyone prioritizing power efficiency and modern process technology. Its 4.2% OpenCL win over the Quadro, combined with a significantly lower TDP and no external power requirement, makes it a far easier card to integrate into a system. The 84th percentile ranking and average score of 45,384 suggest it is a well-rounded performer that sits close to much newer NVIDIA parts like the RTX 4070 Ti and RTX 5880 Ada Generation.

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB, however, is the clear winner for Vulkan applications, where its 14.7% lead over the AMD card is impossible to ignore. The 24 GB of GDDR5 memory and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth are also major assets for large datasets that exceed the AMD card’s 8 GB capacity. If your workload is Vulkan-heavy or memory-bound, the Quadro’s advantages outweigh its older architecture and higher power draw. The 83rd percentile ranking and 43,262 average score are lower than the AMD card’s, but the Vulkan delta is so large that it may be the deciding factor.

Neither card wins outright. The AMD part is more efficient and slightly faster in OpenCL, while the NVIDIA part is faster in Vulkan and offers triple the memory. Choose based on your dominant API and memory requirements.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has an average benchmark score of 45,384, compared to the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB’s 43,262.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two cards?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB scores 46,425 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 14.7% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT’s score of 39,601.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has 24 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 384-bit bus and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT has a 125 W TDP with no power connectors and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB has a 250 W TDP, requires a single 8-pin connector, and a 600 W suggested PSU.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card also supports FP16 compute at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1), which the NVIDIA card does not list.

Q: Which card is ranked higher among all GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT is in the 84th percentile, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB is in the 83rd percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT wins in OpenCL compute, scoring 41,772 versus the Quadro’s 40,098, and it does so with far lower power requirements. Its 7 nm process and 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die make it the efficiency pick, and its FP16 capability at 10.80 TFLOPS gives it an edge in workloads that can use reduced precision. The data also shows it holds a higher average benchmark score and percentile ranking, making it the better all-rounder in synthetic aggregate tests.

The NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB wins decisively in Vulkan, with a 14.7% lead that is the single largest delta in the head-to-head data. Its 24 GB memory capacity and 317.4 GB/s bandwidth are unmatched by the AMD card, and its higher raw FP32 throughput of 6.844 TFLOPS and double the shading units (3072), TMUs (192), and ROPs (96) give it a rasterization advantage. The Quadro also has display outputs, making it usable in a traditional workstation setup, while the AMD card has no outputs.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT uses a 7 nm process and RDNA 1.0 architecture with a 158 mm² die, while the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB uses a 28 nm process and Maxwell 2.0 architecture with a 601 mm² die. Transistor counts are 6,400 million versus 8,000 million, and transistor density is 40.5M/mm² versus 13.3M/mm². Clock speeds favor AMD: 1187 MHz base and 1757 MHz boost versus 988 MHz base and 1114 MHz boost for NVIDIA. Memory differs in size (8 GB GDDR6 versus 24 GB GDDR5), bus width (128-bit versus 384-bit), and bandwidth (224.0 GB/s versus 317.4 GB/s).

Compute units are starkly different: AMD has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while NVIDIA has 3072 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Pixel rate is 56.22 GPixel/s versus 106.9 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 168.7 GTexel/s versus 213.9 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 5.398 TFLOPS versus 6.844 TFLOPS, and only AMD lists FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS. The TDP is 125 W versus 250 W, with AMD being an IGP (no power connector) and NVIDIA being dual-slot with a single 8-pin connector. Suggested PSU is 300 W versus 600 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are absent on AMD, while NVIDIA has 1x DVI and 4x DisplayPort 1.2. Physical dimensions are listed only for NVIDIA at 267 mm length and 111 mm height. The release dates are 2020-08-03 for AMD and 2016-03-04 for NVIDIA, and the NVIDIA card has a launch MSRP of 4,999 USD.