AMD Radeon Pro 5500M vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000M Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M compare to the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M in overall benchmark scores?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M has an average benchmark score of 11,528, while the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M scores 9,832. The Radeon Pro 5500M sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs, whereas the Quadro M2000M is at the 47th percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins decisively with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 31,088 versus 10,057 for the Quadro M2000M, a 209.1% advantage.

Q: What about Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M also dominates Vulkan, scoring 35,134 against the Quadro M2000M's 9,606, which is a 265.8% lead.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Quadro M2000M has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What process nodes do these GPUs use?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is built on TSMC's 7 nm process, while the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M uses TSMC's 28 nm process.

Q: What is the power draw of each card?

A: The Radeon Pro 5500M has a TDP of 85 W, while the Quadro M2000M has a lower TDP of 55 W.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior performer in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. It wins both shared tests, OpenCL and Vulkan, with leads of 209.1% and 265.8% respectively. For any user prioritizing compute throughput or graphics API performance, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the clear choice.

The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M, however, is not without merit. Its 55 W TDP is substantially lower than the Radeon's 85 W, making it the more power-efficient option for constrained chassis. The Quadro M2000M also uses an MXM module form factor, which may be the only compatible option in certain portable workstations.

For users who need maximum compute performance in a mobile workstation, the Radeon Pro 5500M is the pick. For those with strict power budgets or existing MXM-A slot requirements, the Quadro M2000M remains a viable, if slower, alternative. The benchmark data does not support choosing the Quadro M2000M on performance grounds alone.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two GPUs share only two recorded benchmark tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins outright.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the Radeon Pro 5500M scores 31,088 against the Quadro M2000M's 10,057. That is a delta of 209.1%, meaning the AMD card delivers more than three times the raw compute throughput in this test. The gap is even larger in Geekbench Vulkan: 35,134 versus 9,606, a 265.8% advantage. This suggests the Radeon Pro 5500M excels in modern graphics API workloads, while the Quadro M2000M's Maxwell architecture struggles to keep pace.

The overall average scores tell the same story. The Radeon Pro 5500M averages 11,528 across all its benchmarks, placing it 0.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla K20c and 2.4% ahead of the GeForce GTX 780M in its nearest rival group. The Quadro M2000M averages 9,832, sitting 0.5% behind the GeForce GTX 1070 and 1.1% behind the Tesla M10 in its own rival cluster. The Radeon Pro 5500M's average is 17.2% higher than the Quadro M2000M's average.

While the Radeon Pro 5500M has additional benchmark scores in its database entry (including PassMark DirectX tests and a G3D score of 6,732), the Quadro M2000M only records OpenCL and Vulkan results. This limits direct comparison to those two tests, but the margin there is large enough to establish a clear hierarchy.

Specification Differences

The memory subsystems diverge sharply. The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M offers 8 GB of GDDR6 with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M provides 4 GB of GDDR5 with 80.19 GB/s. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the Radeon's faster memory type and doubled capacity give it a substantial data throughput advantage.

Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA card at the base level: the Quadro M2000M runs at 1098 MHz base and 1137 MHz boost, while the Radeon Pro 5500M starts at 1000 MHz base and boosts to 1450 MHz. The Radeon's higher boost clock, combined with its architecture, produces far higher fill rates: 46.40 GPixel/s pixel rate and 139.2 GTexel/s texture rate versus 18.19 GPixel/s and 45.48 GTexel/s on the Quadro.

Compute resources are heavily skewed toward AMD. The Radeon Pro 5500M has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Quadro M2000M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. FP32 throughput is 4.454 TFLOPS for AMD versus 1,455.4 GFLOPS for NVIDIA. The Radeon also supports FP16 at 8.909 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature the Quadro M2000M lacks entirely.

Power and form factor differ as well. The Radeon Pro 5500M draws 85 W TDP with no power connectors and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. The Quadro M2000M draws 55 W TDP, uses an MXM-A (3.0) interface, and comes as an MXM module. Neither card has a launch MSRP recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is built on the Navi 14 chip using RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It contains 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per mm². The architecture supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M uses the GM107 chip with Maxwell architecture, built on TSMC's 28 nm process. It has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, which comes to 12.6 million transistors per mm². It supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning its DirectX feature level is one step lower than the AMD card.

The process node difference is stark: 7 nm versus 28 nm. This explains the transistor density gap, with the Radeon packing over three times as many transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 5500M belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Mobile) generation, while the Quadro M2000M is part of the Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) generation. The Quadro's predecessor is listed as Quadro Kepler-M, and its successor is Quadro Pascal-M. The Radeon has no predecessor or successor listed.

Neither GPU has ray tracing cores or tensor cores. Both are end-of-life products, with the Radeon released on 2019-11-12 and the Quadro released on 2015-12-02. The four-year gap in release dates aligns with the architectural generational leap.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro 5500M wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its OpenCL score of 31,088 and Vulkan score of 35,134 are both far beyond the Quadro M2000M's 10,057 and 9,606. Users running compute-heavy workloads, machine learning inference, or modern graphics APIs should choose the Radeon Pro 5500M without hesitation.

The Radeon also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 8 GB GDDR6 configuration with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth supports larger datasets and faster texture streaming than the Quadro's 4 GB GDDR5 at 80.19 GB/s. For tasks like rendering large scenes or processing high-resolution textures, this is a decisive advantage.

The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M wins on power efficiency. Its 55 W TDP is 30 W lower than the Radeon Pro 5500M's 85 W TDP. In a mobile workstation with limited thermal headroom or battery life concerns, the Quadro draws less power and generates less heat. Its MXM module form factor also makes it the only choice in systems that require that specific interface.

The Quadro M2000M's base clock is slightly higher at 1098 MHz versus 1000 MHz, but the Radeon's boost clock of 1450 MHz far exceeds the Quadro's 1137 MHz. In sustained workloads where boost clocks matter, the Radeon pulls ahead.

For users who prioritize compute performance, modern API support, and memory throughput, the AMD Radeon Pro 5500M is the definitive winner. For users who need a low-power, MXM-based solution and can accept significantly lower performance, the NVIDIA Quadro M2000M remains an option. The benchmark data does not show any test where the Quadro M2000M outperforms the Radeon Pro 5500M.