GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data presents a starkly one-sided comparison. In the two common benchmark tests recorded for both cards, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 dominates the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT with decisive margins. The largest gap appears in Geekbench OpenCL, where the RTX A6000 scores 193,937 against the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's 41,772. That is a 78.5% deficit for the AMD card, meaning the NVIDIA solution delivers roughly 4.6 times the compute throughput in this workload. The margin narrows slightly in Geekbench Vulkan, but remains overwhelming: the RTX A6000 posts 164,462 while the Radeon Pro 5500 XT manages 39,601, a 75.9% difference. In both tests, the AMD card fails to secure a single win; the head-to-head tally stands at 2 wins for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

These are not marginal deltas. A 78.5% gap in OpenCL performance suggests fundamental architectural scaling differences rather than clock speed variations. The RTX A6000's raw compute resources, 7 times the shading units, 3.5 times the texture mapping units, and 3.5 times the raster operations pipelines, translate directly into this benchmark dominance. What is curious is that the RTX A6000's average benchmark score across all its recorded tests (44,075) sits only slightly above the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's average (45,384), despite the massive head-to-head victories. This discrepancy hints that the AMD card performs relatively better in other unshared workloads, or that the RTX A6000's score is dragged down by its DirectX and 2D tests, which are not part of the direct comparison.

Examining the nearest rivals provides additional context. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT's average score of 45,384 places it within a tight cluster: it is 0.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile (45,152) and 1.3% ahead of the RTX 4070 Ti (44,795), while trailing the Intel Arc A730M (45,592) by 0.5% and the RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972) by 1.3%. The RTX A6000, despite its 84th percentile ranking, sits slightly below this cluster in average terms, at 44,075, 0.9% behind the RTX 4090 Mobile (43,667 is the rival's score, but the delta shows A6000 is behind) and 1.6% behind the RTX 4070 Ti. This creates an interesting paradox: the A6000 crushes the 5500 XT in direct competition, yet their aggregate benchmark profiles are nearly identical.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear conclusion: pick the NVIDIA RTX A6000 for any workload that stresses OpenCL or Vulkan compute. The 78.5% and 75.9% leads in those respective tests are not merely competitive advantages, they are categorical separations. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT cannot close this gap through any configuration or driver setting; the hardware difference is simply too large. For professionals running GPU-accelerated rendering, simulation, or machine learning inference that leverages these APIs, the RTX A6000 is the only rational choice based on benchmark evidence.

However, the Radeon Pro 5500 XT is not without a statistical case. Its average benchmark score of 45,384 actually exceeds the RTX A6000's 44,075, and both cards occupy the identical 84th percentile among all GPUs. If the workload portfolio is diverse, spanning DirectX, Vulkan, and compute tasks not captured in the head-to-head, the AMD card's aggregate consistency might serve adequately. The RTX A6000's additional test suite reveals weaknesses: its PassMark DirectX 12 score of 87 is notably low, and even its best DirectX result (245 in DirectX 9) suggests that legacy or D3D-centric applications do not showcase its strengths. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT, with no recorded DirectX scores in this data, could theoretically perform differently, but no evidence supports superiority there.

The practical verdict speaks to workload specificity. If your application is compute-heavy and uses OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A6000 wins without qualification. If you need a general-purpose card with balanced performance across varied benchmarks, the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's higher average score and identical percentile ranking make it a defensible alternative, provided you do not require the A6000's massive memory capacity or rendering throughput. The data does not support calling the AMD card a "winner" anywhere in direct comparison, but it does show that the two cards belong to the same performance tier when viewed across all benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs explains every benchmark gap. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA RTX A6000 counters with the GA102 chip on Ampere architecture, produced by Samsung on an 8 nm node. This chip houses 28,300 million transistors across a massive 628 mm² die, achieving a density of 45.1 million per square millimeter.

The transistor count difference, 4.4 times more in the NVIDIA chip, is the root cause of the performance disparity. The RTX A6000 deploys 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, versus the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. NVIDIA's Ampere architecture also includes dedicated hardware absent from the AMD card: 84 RT cores for ray tracing and 336 tensor cores for AI acceleration. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT has no RT or tensor core equivalents, relying purely on its shader array for all compute.

Memory architecture diverges equally dramatically. The AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A6000 offers 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, reaching 768.0 GB/s, 3.4 times the bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 5500 XT's FP32 throughput is 5.398 TFLOPS, while the RTX A6000 achieves 38.71 TFLOPS, a 7.2-fold advantage. Even the FP16 capabilities tell a story: the AMD card halves its rate to 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the NVIDIA card maintains full rate at 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). Both cards support DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the RTX A6000's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) feature level exceeds the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's baseline 12_1.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every measurable specification. The RTX A6000's base clock runs at 1410 MHz and boosts to 1800 MHz, while the Radeon Pro 5500 XT starts at 1187 MHz and boosts to 1757 MHz, closer than the compute gap would suggest. Memory clocks differ: the AMD card runs at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), the NVIDIA at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective). Power requirements scale with performance: the Radeon Pro 5500 XT draws 125 W TDP and recommends a 300 W PSU, while the RTX A6000 demands 300 W TDP and a 700 W PSU.

Form factors contrast sharply. The AMD card is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no slot width, no power connectors, no display outputs, and no recorded dimensions. The NVIDIA card is a dual-slot design measuring 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length and 112 mm (4.4 inches) in height, powered by an 8-pin EPS connector, and featuring 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. Bus interfaces also differ: the Radeon Pro 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RTX A6000 uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The RTX A6000 has a recorded launch MSRP of 4,649 USD; the AMD card has no launch MSRP in the data.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000, with 38.71 TFLOPS FP32 versus the AMD Radeon Pro 5500 XT's 5.398 TFLOPS, a 7.2-fold difference.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The RTX A6000 delivers 768.0 GB/s across a 384-bit bus, while the Radeon Pro 5500 XT provides 224.0 GB/s on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 5500 XT support ray tracing hardware?

A: No. The data lists no RT cores for the AMD card, while the RTX A6000 includes 84 RT cores.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500 XT averages 45,384, while the RTX A6000 averages 44,075, despite the latter winning both head-to-head tests.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the data.

Q: What display outputs does the Radeon Pro 5500 XT offer?

A: The data lists "No outputs" for the AMD card, whereas the RTX A6000 provides 4x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX A6000 wins in every direct benchmark comparison recorded. Its 78.5% OpenCL lead and 75.9% Vulkan lead define the compute-centric use case. For professionals running OpenCL-accelerated physics simulations, Vulkan-based rendering engines, or any workload leveraging the 336 tensor cores for AI inference, the RTX A6000 is the clear choice. Its 48 GB memory capacity, 6 times the AMD card's 8 GB, suits large dataset processing, high-resolution texture workloads, and multi-GPU configurations where memory pooling matters. The dual-slot form factor and 4x DisplayPort outputs make it suitable for multi-monitor professional workstations.

The Radeon Pro 5500 XT wins in aggregate consistency and efficiency. Its higher average benchmark score (45,384 vs 44,075) and identical 84th percentile ranking indicate balanced performance across diverse workloads. The 125 W TDP with no power connectors and IGP form factor means it integrates into systems without dedicated power delivery, a significant advantage for compact or legacy platforms. Its 7 nm process and smaller die (158 mm² vs 628 mm²) suggest lower manufacturing complexity. For users whose applications span DirectX, OpenGL, and compute without concentrating on OpenCL or Vulkan, the Radeon Pro 5500 XT's profile is competitive. The data also shows it slightly outperforms the RTX 4070 Ti (1.3% higher average) and the RTX 5090 Mobile (0.5% higher), placing it in respectable company despite its compute deficit.

The use-case split is therefore sharp: the RTX A6000 for compute-intensive, memory-hungry professional workloads; the Radeon Pro 5500 XT for balanced, power-conscious deployments where its aggregate benchmark strength and identical percentile ranking provide sufficient capability. Neither card wins across the board, but the RTX A6000's victories are far more consequential for demanding applications.