AMD Radeon Pro 5500M vs AMD Radeon RX 6600S Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6600S is the clear performance winner, taking 7 of 8 head-to-head benchmark comparisons and often doubling or nearly doubling the output of the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M. The sole exception is a tie in 2D graphics, where the Pro 5500M edges ahead by a fraction of a percent, making the RX 6600S the superior choice for virtually all compute and 3D workloads, while the Pro 5500M retains only a negligible advantage in 2D desktop tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6600S dominates the Pro 5500M across every meaningful performance category. In compute-heavy workloads, the gap is enormous: the RX 6600S scores 66435 in Geekbench OpenCL, a 53.2% improvement over the Pro 5500M's 31088. This translates to a decisive edge in GPU-accelerated applications, rendering, and any task that leverages raw shader throughput. The RX 6600S also wins decisively in DirectX gaming benchmarks, with Passmark DirectX 11 scores of 105 versus 42 (a 60% difference), and DirectX 12 scores of 56 versus 29 (a 48.2% difference). For 3D graphics, the RX 6600S posts a Passmark G3D score of 12649 compared to 6732, a 46.8% lead, indicating substantially better performance in modern game engines and 3D rendering workloads.

The Pro 5500M’s only win comes in Passmark G2D, scoring 648 versus 647, a 0.2% margin that is effectively a statistical tie. This indicates that for basic 2D desktop rendering, window management, and legacy 2D applications, both cards perform identically, with the Pro 5500M holding a razor-thin edge that will be imperceptible in real-world use. The Pro 5500M does not win any other benchmark, losing in DirectX 9 (96 vs 176), DirectX 10 (36 vs 81), and GPU compute (3240 vs 4879) by margins ranging from 33.6% to 55.6%.

The data makes the use-case split clear: the RX 6600S is the choice for any workload involving 3D graphics, gaming, or general-purpose GPU compute, while the Pro 5500M offers no practical advantage outside of a negligible 2D performance edge.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6600S, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 66435 versus the Pro 5500M's 31088, representing a 53.2% advantage in that test.

Q: Is the Pro 5500M better for any gaming workload?

A: No. The RX 6600S wins all DirectX gaming benchmarks, including DirectX 9 (176 vs 96), DirectX 10 (81 vs 36), DirectX 11 (105 vs 42), and DirectX 12 (56 vs 29).

Q: How do the two compare in overall 3D performance?

A: The RX 6600S is significantly faster, scoring 12649 in Passmark G3D compared to 6732 for the Pro 5500M, a 46.8% difference.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Pro 5500M wins?

A: Yes, in Passmark G2D, the Pro 5500M scores 648 versus 647 for the RX 6600S, a 0.2% margin that is effectively a tie.

Q: Which GPU has better compute performance for non-graphics tasks?

A: The RX 6600S, which scores 4879 in Passmark GPU Compute versus 3240 for the Pro 5500M, a 33.6% advantage.

Q: What is the overall benchmark score difference?

A: The Pro 5500M has an average benchmark score of 11528, placing it in the 51st percentile, while the RX 6600S averages 10629, placing it in the 49th percentile despite winning the head-to-head tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 6600S’s most dominant victory comes in Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 66435 against the Pro 5500M's 31088, a 53.2% lead. This is the largest single delta in the comparison and highlights the architectural advantage of the newer RDNA 2.0 design in compute-heavy scenarios. In DirectX 11, the RX 6600S scores 105 versus 42, a 60% difference, making it the largest percentage gap across all tests. DirectX 10 shows a similar trend: 81 versus 36, a 55.6% margin. DirectX 12 results are closer but still lopsided, with the RX 6600S achieving 56 against 29, a 48.2% advantage. DirectX 9 performance favors the RX 6600S at 176 versus 96, a 45.5% gap.

In the 3D graphics test, Passmark G3D, the RX 6600S nearly doubles the Pro 5500M's output, scoring 12649 versus 6732, a 46.8% improvement. The compute test, Passmark GPU Compute, shows a smaller but still substantial gap: 4879 versus 3240, a 33.6% lead for the RX 6600S. The only benchmark where the Pro 5500M takes the win is Passmark G2D, scoring 648 against 647, a 0.2% margin that falls within statistical noise. Across all seven winning tests, the RX 6600S demonstrates a consistent and substantial performance advantage, ranging from 33.6% to 60%, while the Pro 5500M’s sole victory is effectively a tie.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ fundamentally in their core configurations. The RX 6600S has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units, while the Pro 5500M has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the RX 6600S a 16.7% advantage in shader count, a 16.7% advantage in TMUs, and a full 100% advantage in ROPs, explaining its superiority in pixel-heavy workloads. Clock speeds also diverge sharply: the RX 6600S runs at a base of 1700 MHz and boost of 2000 MHz, with a game clock of 1881 MHz, while the Pro 5500M operates at 1000 MHz base and 1450 MHz boost.

Memory configurations differ in capacity but not bus width. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), yielding 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6600S has 4 GB of GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), yielding 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, a 16.7% increase in bandwidth despite half the capacity. The RX 6600S also has a higher TDP of 80 W versus 85 W for the Pro 5500M, though both are power-efficient mobile parts with no external power connectors. The RX 6600S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the Pro 5500M is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), a generational API difference.

Architecture Differences

The Pro 5500M is built on the Navi 14 chip using the RDNA 1.0 architecture, while the RX 6600S uses the Navi 23 chip with the RDNA 2.0 architecture. This represents a full architectural generation leap. The RX 6600S features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the Pro 5500M completely lacks, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing in supported games. The RX 6600S also has a higher transistor count at 11,060 million versus 6,400 million, and a larger die size at 237 mm² versus 158 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 46.7M per mm² compared to 40.5M per mm². Both are fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, but the RDNA 2.0 architecture in the RX 6600S delivers higher compute throughput per clock, as evidenced by its FP32 performance of 7.168 TFLOPS versus 4.454 TFLOPS for the Pro 5500M.

The RX 6600S also achieves higher pixel and texture rates: 128.0 GPixel/s and 224.0 GTexel/s, respectively, versus 46.40 GPixel/s and 139.2 GTexel/s for the Pro 5500M. The RX 6600S supports FP16 at 14.34 TFLOPS (2:1) compared to 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Pro 5500M. In terms of production timeline, the Pro 5500M is from the Radeon Pro Mac generation, released on 2019-11-12, while the RX 6600S is from the Navi Mobile RX 6000M generation, released on 2022-01-03, with the RX 6600S listing Polaris Mobile as its predecessor. Both are end-of-life products with a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally favors the AMD Radeon RX 6600S for any user prioritizing performance. It wins 7 of 8 head-to-head matchups, with victory margins from 33.6% in GPU compute to 60% in DirectX 11. Its 1792 shading units, 64 ROPs, and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial hardware foundation, while the RDNA 2.0 architecture adds ray tracing support and DirectX 12 Ultimate compatibility that the Pro 5500M cannot offer. The RX 6600S is the clear pick for gamers, 3D artists, and anyone running compute-intensive applications.

The Pro 5500M’s only claim to relevance is its 8 GB memory capacity, double that of the RX 6600S, and its 0.2% edge in 2D graphics. For workloads requiring large frame buffers, such as certain professional visualization tasks, the extra 4 GB could be a deciding factor, but benchmark data shows it loses decisively in every compute and 3D test. Its 51st percentile ranking versus the RX 6600S's 49th percentile is misleading, as the head-to-head results show the RX 6600S is faster in nearly all scenarios. Users needing maximum memory capacity over raw speed might consider the Pro 5500M, but for all other purposes, the RX 6600S is the superior mobile GPU based on the available evidence.