AMD Radeon Pro 5500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M represent two distinct generations of mobile graphics, separated by nearly five years of architectural evolution. The recorded data shows a substantial performance gulf between them, driven by differences in manufacturing process, compute resources, memory technology, and API support. This analysis examines their benchmark results, architectural distinctions, and the practical implications of those differences based solely on the measurements in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two directly comparable benchmark results for these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both tests, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M delivers a decisive victory over the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 31,088 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M manages 11,045 points. This represents a 181.5% advantage for the AMD part. The margin is not a close contest; the Radeon Pro 5500M more than doubles the older NVIDIA GPU's compute output in this cross-platform compute benchmark. OpenCL results are particularly relevant for general-purpose GPU workloads, and the delta indicates that the newer architecture handles these tasks with far greater efficiency.

The Geekbench Vulkan test shows an even larger gap. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 35,134 points, compared to 8,245 points for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M. This is a 326.1% difference, meaning the AMD GPU delivers more than four times the Vulkan performance of the NVIDIA part. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics and compute API, and the massive delta suggests that the Radeon Pro 5500M's architecture is substantially better suited to modern, driver-efficient rendering paths. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M, built on the older Maxwell architecture, appears severely limited in this API.

Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins both, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M records zero victories. The average benchmark score for the AMD part is 11,528 points across its full benchmark suite, placing it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs in the database. The NVIDIA GPU's average score is 9,645 points, which places it in the 46th percentile. While the percentile difference appears modest, the head-to-head deltas reveal that the Radeon Pro 5500M is dramatically faster in the tests where both are measured.

The nearest rivals in the database provide additional context. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M sits within 0.4% of the NVIDIA Tesla K20c (which scores 11,479 on average) and is 0.8% behind the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11,627 points). It is also 1.3% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 (11,680 points) and 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M (11,261 points). This clustering indicates that, despite its mobile positioning and end-of-life status, the Radeon Pro 5500M performs in the same general band as several desktop and workstation GPUs that are well regarded in their respective categories.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M's nearest rivals tell a similar story at a lower performance tier. It is 0.1% ahead of the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (9,637 points), 0.1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (9,653 points), 0.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (9,665 points), and 0.7% behind the NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (9,716 points). These are older or entry-level professional parts, and the GTX 960M's placement among them reinforces its position as a mid-range mobile GPU from the 2015 era.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins in every benchmark category where both GPUs have recorded results. Its advantages are most pronounced in modern, low-level APIs and compute workloads. The Vulkan score of 35,134 versus 8,245 demonstrates that the Radeon Pro 5500M is the clear choice for applications that leverage Vulkan for rendering or compute. The OpenCL result of 31,088 versus 11,045 similarly establishes its dominance in general-purpose compute tasks, which are common in professional workflows such as video encoding, machine learning inference, and scientific simulation.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M does not win any recorded benchmark against the Radeon Pro 5500M. However, its profile in the database is less complete. The GTX 960M only has results for Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon Pro 5500M has results across Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, and several Passmark tests. This asymmetry in data availability means that some comparisons are simply not possible. For instance, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235 in Geekbench Metal, a test that the GTX 960M does not appear in. Similarly, Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores exist for the AMD part but not for the NVIDIA part.

For users of the GTX 960M, the practical takeaway is that its strengths lie in compatibility with older software and its established ecosystem, but the recorded data does not show any benchmark where it outperforms the newer AMD part. The GTX 960M's 4 GB of GDDR5 memory and 128-bit bus are sufficient for its generation, but they are far outmatched by the Radeon Pro 5500M's 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on the same bus width. In scenarios where memory capacity matters, such as large texture sets or compute datasets, the AMD GPU has a clear edge.

The Radeon Pro 5500M also wins in raw throughput metrics. Its pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s. The GTX 960M, by comparison, offers 18.82 GPixel/s and 47.04 GTexel/s. These figures, while not benchmark scores, explain the performance gap in rasterization-heavy workloads. The AMD GPU can fill the screen with pixels and apply textures at nearly three times the rate of the NVIDIA part. Its FP32 throughput of 4.454 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 960M's 1.505 TFLOPS, which is especially relevant for compute tasks that rely on single-precision floating point.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip based on the RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M uses the GM107 chip based on the Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is substantial: 7 nm versus 28 nm. This allows the AMD GPU to pack 6,400 million transistors into a die size of 158 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GPU contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, for a density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The RDNA 1.0 architecture achieves more than three times the transistor density of Maxwell, which is a direct consequence of the more advanced fabrication process.

The compute resources differ accordingly. The Radeon Pro 5500M has 1,536 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operations pipelines. The GTX 960M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These are not directly comparable across architectures, but the scale of the difference is clear. The AMD GPU has more than twice the shading units, more than twice the TMUs, and exactly twice the ROPs.

Memory subsystems also diverge significantly. The Radeon Pro 5500M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock operates at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective data rate. The GTX 960M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth is only 80.19 GB/s, with a memory clock of 1253 MHz and 5 Gbps effective data rate. The Radeon Pro 5500M offers more than double the memory bandwidth and twice the capacity, which is critical for high-resolution textures and memory-intensive compute workloads.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The GTX 960M has a higher base clock of 1097 MHz and a boost clock of 1176 MHz. The Radeon Pro 5500M has a lower base clock of 1000 MHz but a significantly higher boost clock of 1450 MHz. The boost clock advantage of the AMD part, combined with its architectural efficiency, contributes to its superior performance. Power consumption is similar on paper: the Radeon Pro 5500M has a TDP of 85 W, while the GTX 960M has a TDP of 75 W. The 10 W difference is modest, and the AMD GPU delivers far more performance within that power envelope.

API support is another differentiator. The Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 960M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The DirectX feature level difference is notable: 12_1 versus 11_0. This means the AMD GPU supports more advanced DirectX 12 features, which can affect rendering quality and performance in newer games and applications. The bus interface also differs. The Radeon Pro 5500M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 960M uses MXM-B (3.0), a module form factor rather than a traditional PCIe connection. The Radeon Pro 5500M is described as having no power connectors and being portable device dependent, as is the GTX 960M.

The production status of both GPUs is end-of-life. The Radeon Pro 5500M was released on November 12, 2019, while the GTX 960M was released on March 12, 2015. The GTX 960M has a documented predecessor, the GeForce 800M, and successor, the GeForce 10 Mobile. The Radeon Pro 5500M has no listed predecessor or successor in the database. Neither GPU has a launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher compute performance in OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 31,088 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 11,045 for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M. This is a 181.5% advantage for the AMD GPU.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M scores 35,134 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M scores 8,245. The AMD GPU leads by 326.1%.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M uses a 28 nm process, also at TSMC.

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M win any benchmark in the head-to-head comparison?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head benchmarks, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins both. The GTX 960M has zero wins in the head-to-head data.

Q: What is the DirectX feature level support for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0.

The Verdict

The data in the database is unambiguous. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M by enormous margins in every directly comparable benchmark. The OpenCL result shows a 181.5% lead, and the Vulkan result shows a 326.1% lead. No recorded test favors the GTX 960M.

For users seeking maximum mobile graphics performance in modern APIs and compute workloads, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the only choice supported by the measurements. Its 7 nm RDNA 1.0 architecture, 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, and 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput place it in a different performance class than the 28 nm Maxwell-based GTX 960M, which offers 1.505 TFLOPS and 4 GB of GDDR5 memory. The Radeon Pro 5500M's average benchmark score of 11,528 points and 51st percentile ranking, alongside nearest rivals like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 and AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT, confirm that it competes with much newer and more powerful hardware.

The GTX 960M, with its average score of 9,645 points and 46th percentile ranking, sits among older professional GPUs such as the Quadro K5000 and Tesla C2070. It remains a functional mobile GPU for its era, but the recorded data shows no scenario where it beats the Radeon Pro 5500M. Users with workloads that rely on Vulkan or OpenCL should expect a transformative performance uplift from the newer AMD part. The GTX 960M may still run legacy DirectX 11 applications, as its DirectX 12 feature level of 11_0 indicates, but the Radeon Pro 5500M's DirectX 12_1 support and superior raw throughput make it the stronger option for any modern workload. The verdict, strictly from the data, is that the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior GPU in all measured aspects.