AMD Radeon Pro 5500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits this comparison into two distinct eras of GPU design. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins 4 of 10 recorded tests, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK takes 6. The margins, however, tell a more nuanced story than the win count suggests.

In modern compute APIs, the Radeon Pro 5500M dominates decisively. Its Geekbench Metal score of 38,235 crushes the TITAN BLACK's 24,172, a 58.2% advantage. This is the single largest delta in the entire head-to-head set. The Vulkan results follow a similar pattern: 35,134 versus 29,561, a 18.9% lead for the AMD part. OpenCL shows a narrower but still clear 14.2% margin, with scores of 31,088 against 27,218.

The TITAN BLACK fights back hard in legacy DirectX workloads. Its PassMark DirectX 11 score of 73 dwarfs the Radeon's 42, a massive 42.5% gap. DirectX 9 shows a 27.8% advantage (133 versus 96), and DirectX 10 gives the NVIDIA card a 23.4% edge (47 versus 36). Even in DirectX 12, where modern architectures typically excel, the TITAN BLACK wins 34 to 29, a 14.7% margin.

The overall graphics picture favors NVIDIA. The PassMark G3D score of 9,184 for the TITAN BLACK beats the Radeon's 6,732 by 26.7%. Compute performance in PassMark also leans NVIDIA: 3,726 versus 3,240, a 13% gap. The only other AMD victory comes in PassMark G2D, where 648 beats 595 by 8.9%.

Average benchmark scores confirm the split. The Radeon Pro 5500M sits at 11,528 average, placing it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs. The TITAN BLACK averages 9,474, landing in the 46th percentile. Despite losing the head-to-head count, the AMD card holds the higher overall position. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA Tesla K20c, scores 11,479, just 0.4% behind. The TITAN BLACK's closest competitor, the GeForce GTX 760, scores 9,458, a 0.2% difference.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies separated by five years of process technology advancement. The Radeon Pro 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process. The TITAN BLACK relies on the GK110B chip with Kepler architecture, using a 28 nm process from the same foundry.

Transistor counts reveal the density revolution. The TITAN BLACK packs 7,080 million transistors into a 561 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.6 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 5500M crams 6,400 million transistors into just 158 mm², achieving 40.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip is physically much smaller yet nearly matches the larger NVIDIA die in transistor count.

Memory architectures diverge sharply. The Radeon uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The TITAN BLACK ships with 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, achieving 336.0 GB/s. The older card's wider memory interface provides 75% more bandwidth, a significant advantage in bandwidth-sensitive workloads.

Clock speeds favor the AMD design. The Radeon Pro 5500M runs at a 1000 MHz base and 1450 MHz boost, while the TITAN BLACK operates at 889 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. The Radeon's higher clocks, combined with the RDNA architecture, produce impressive throughput numbers despite fewer execution resources.

Shader configurations tell a complementary story. The TITAN BLACK fields 2,880 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 48 render output units. The Radeon Pro 5500M has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. NVIDIA's raw hardware advantage shows in pixel rate (58.80 GPixel/s versus 46.40 GPixel/s) and texture rate (235.2 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s).

Compute throughput flips in AMD's favor. The Radeon delivers 4.454 TFLOPS FP32, while the TITAN BLACK reaches 5.645 TFLOPS. However, the Radeon Pro 5500M supports FP16 at 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature the Kepler card lacks entirely. The NVIDIA card has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power efficiency is starkly different. The Radeon Pro 5500M draws 85 W, while the TITAN BLACK requires 250 W. The AMD card achieves its performance at roughly one-third the power envelope. The TITAN BLACK needs dual power connectors (1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin) and a recommended 600 W power supply, while the Radeon uses no external power connectors, reflecting its mobile-oriented design.

API support shows generational progress. The Radeon Pro 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the TITAN BLACK manages DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both offer OpenGL 4.6. The Radeon also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, doubling the bandwidth of the TITAN BLACK's PCIe 3.0 x16 connection in per-lane throughput.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split: the Radeon Pro 5500M excels in modern compute and graphics APIs, while the TITAN BLACK dominates legacy DirectX workloads and raw rasterization. The Radeon wins the three Geekbench tests by margins ranging from 14.2% to 58.2%, while the TITAN BLACK takes four of five DirectX tests with gaps up to 42.5%.

For users working with Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior choice. Its 58.2% Metal advantage is particularly notable, reflecting its optimization for Apple's ecosystem. The 18.9% Vulkan lead and 14.2% OpenCL edge reinforce this pattern.

For DirectX gaming or applications relying on legacy APIs, the TITAN BLACK retains relevance. Its 42.5% DirectX 11 advantage and 26.7% G3D lead make it the stronger pick for older titles or DX11-centric workloads. The 13% compute lead in PassMark GPU Compute adds another feather to NVIDIA's cap.

The average benchmark scores favor the Radeon Pro 5500M overall, with an 11,528 average versus 9,474. This 21.7% advantage in aggregate performance, combined with dramatically lower power consumption and a smaller die, makes the AMD card the more technically accomplished product. The TITAN BLACK's strengths lie in specific legacy scenarios rather than overall capability.

Specification Differences

Process Node: The Radeon Pro 5500M uses 7 nm TSMC fabrication; the TITAN BLACK uses 28 nm TSMC.

Transistors: AMD packs 6,400 million; NVIDIA has 7,080 million.

Die Size: AMD measures 158 mm²; NVIDIA measures 561 mm².

Transistor Density: AMD achieves 40.5M per mm²; NVIDIA achieves 12.6M per mm².

Base Clock: AMD runs 1000 MHz; NVIDIA runs 889 MHz.

Boost Clock: AMD boosts to 1450 MHz; NVIDIA boosts to 980 MHz.

Memory Size: AMD offers 8 GB GDDR6; NVIDIA offers 6 GB GDDR5.

Memory Bus: AMD uses 128-bit; NVIDIA uses 384-bit.

Memory Bandwidth: AMD delivers 192.0 GB/s; NVIDIA delivers 336.0 GB/s.

Memory Clock: AMD runs 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective); NVIDIA runs 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective).

Shading Units: AMD has 1,536; NVIDIA has 2,880.

TMUs: AMD has 96; NVIDIA has 240.

ROPs: AMD has 32; NVIDIA has 48.

Pixel Rate: AMD achieves 46.40 GPixel/s; NVIDIA achieves 58.80 GPixel/s.

Texture Rate: AMD achieves 139.2 GTexel/s; NVIDIA achieves 235.2 GTexel/s.

FP32: AMD delivers 4.454 TFLOPS; NVIDIA delivers 5.645 TFLOPS.

FP16: AMD delivers 8.909 TFLOPS; NVIDIA has no recorded FP16.

TDP: AMD draws 85 W; NVIDIA draws 250 W.

Power Connectors: AMD uses none; NVIDIA uses 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin.

Suggested PSU: AMD lists none; NVIDIA recommends 600 W.

Bus Interface: AMD uses PCIe 4.0 x8; NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Display Outputs: AMD is portable device dependent; NVIDIA offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2.

DirectX Support: AMD supports 12 (12_1); NVIDIA supports 12 (11_1).

Vulkan Support: AMD supports 1.4; NVIDIA supports 1.2.175.

Slot Width: AMD lists none; NVIDIA is dual-slot.

Dimensions: AMD lists none; NVIDIA measures 267 mm length, 111 mm height, 38 mm width.

Release Date: AMD launched 2019-11-12; NVIDIA launched 2014-02-17.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M averages 11,528, which is 21.7% higher than the TITAN BLACK's 9,474 average.

Q: How large is the Metal performance gap?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M scores 38,235 in Geekbench Metal, beating the TITAN BLACK's 24,172 by 58.2%.

Q: Which card performs better in DirectX 11?

A: The TITAN BLACK scores 73 in PassMark DirectX 11, well ahead of the Radeon's 42, a 42.5% advantage.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M draws 85 W, while the TITAN BLACK consumes 250 W, a nearly threefold difference.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 5500M support FP16 compute?

A: Yes, it delivers 8.909 TFLOPS FP16 at a 2:1 ratio. The TITAN BLACK has no recorded FP16 capability.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The TITAN BLACK achieves 336.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, compared to the Radeon's 192.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins in modern compute environments. Metal performance is its standout category, with a 58.2% lead over the TITAN BLACK. Vulkan follows at 18.9% ahead, and OpenCL adds a 14.2% margin. The 2D graphics test also favors AMD, with an 8.9% edge. Its 7 nm process, FP16 support, and higher clock speeds make it the better choice for contemporary workloads, particularly those leveraging Apple's ecosystem or modern cross-platform APIs.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK wins in legacy DirectX scenarios. Its DirectX 11 lead of 42.5% is the most decisive NVIDIA victory, followed by 27.8% in DirectX 9 and 23.4% in DirectX 10. Even DirectX 12 shows a 14.7% NVIDIA edge. The overall PassMark G3D score favors NVIDIA by 26.7%, and GPU compute performance adds a 13% win. The 384-bit memory bus and higher texture and pixel rates give it an advantage in bandwidth-hungry rasterization workloads.

Users should choose based on their API requirements. The Radeon Pro 5500M suits developers and professionals working with Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL, offering superior efficiency at 85 W. The TITAN BLACK serves those running older DirectX titles or applications optimized for Kepler's raw throughput, accepting 250 W power draw and a dual-slot footprint. The percentile rankings reflect this: the Radeon sits at 51st percentile overall, while the TITAN BLACK rests at 46th, confirming the AMD card's broader modern appeal despite losing the head-to-head win count.