AMD Radeon Pro 555 vs AMD Radeon Pro W5500 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep in favor of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 across all three shared benchmark tests. The W5500 wins every head-to-head comparison, with deltas that range from roughly 2.3x to nearly 3x the performance of the Radeon Pro 555. This is not a marginal gap; it is a generational and architectural chasm made visible through raw compute scores.

In Geekbench Metal, the W5500 records 54302 points against 16236 for the Pro 555, a delta of 234.5%. That means the W5500 more than triples the Pro 555's Metal score. For applications that rely on Apple's Metal API, the database indicates a massive advantage for the newer card. The Pro 555, by contrast, sits at a score that places it far behind, and the gap is so large that no workload optimization could reasonably close it.

Geekbench OpenCL shows an even wider margin. The W5500 scores 45615, while the Pro 555 manages only 11682. The delta here is 290.5%, meaning the W5500 is nearly four times faster in this compute-oriented test. OpenCL is often used for general-purpose GPU compute, and the data suggests the W5500's architecture handles these workloads with far greater efficiency. The Pro 555's score is less than a third of the W5500's, which aligns with its older GCN design and lower transistor count.

Vulkan results follow the same pattern. The W5500 posts 42021, versus 12303 for the Pro 555, a delta of 241.6%. Vulkan is a cross-platform graphics and compute API, and the W5500's advantage here is consistent with its other wins. The Pro 555's Vulkan score is slightly higher than its OpenCL score, but still far below the W5500's output. Across all three APIs, the W5500's superiority is unambiguous.

The wins tally confirms this: the W5500 takes 3 wins, the Pro 555 takes 0. There is no benchmark in the shared set where the Pro 555 comes out ahead. Even the Pro 555's strongest relative showing, Metal, still leaves it at less than half the W5500's score. The average benchmark score for the W5500 is 15679, while the Pro 555 averages 13407. That overall average difference of roughly 17% is smaller than the head-to-head deltas because the W5500's average includes its lower DirectX scores, but the direct comparisons are what matter most for this analysis.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different eras and entirely different architectural families. The W5500 is built on Navi 14, using RDNA 1.0, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Pro 555 uses Polaris 21, based on GCN 4.0, on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The node shrink from 14 nm to 7 nm is a major factor in the W5500's efficiency and performance headroom.

Transistor counts reflect this generational leap. The W5500 packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. The Pro 555 has 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, for a density of 24.4 million per square millimeter. The W5500's density is nearly double, which explains how it fits more compute units into a similar physical footprint.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The W5500 offers 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s and a memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The Pro 555 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 81.60 GB/s at 1275 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective). The W5500's bandwidth is nearly three times higher, which directly impacts texture streaming and compute workloads that saturate memory.

Compute resources follow the same trend. The W5500 has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 raster operation pipelines. The Pro 555 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The W5500 roughly doubles the shading units and TMUs, and doubles the ROP count as well. Pixel rate for the W5500 is 59.36 GPixel/s versus 13.60 GPixel/s for the Pro 555, and texture rate is 163.2 GTexel/s versus 40.80 GTexel/s. These are raw throughput figures that scale directly with the hardware counts.

FP32 performance tells the same story: the W5500 delivers 5.224 TFLOPS, while the Pro 555 manages 1,305.6 GFLOPS, which is roughly 1.3 TFLOPS. The W5500 is about four times faster in single-precision compute. FP16 also differs: the W5500 hits 10.45 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the Pro 555 stays at 1,305.6 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio. The W5500's ability to double FP16 throughput is a feature the older card lacks.

The W5500 uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro 555 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Both support DirectX 12, but the W5500 is at feature level 12_1 versus 12_0 for the Pro 555. Vulkan support also differs: 1.4 for the W5500, 1.3 for the Pro 555. OpenGL is the same at 4.6. Power draw is 125 W for the W5500 with a single 6-pin connector, while the Pro 555 is an IGP at 75 W with no connectors. The W5500 is single-slot, the Pro 555 is integrated.

Where Each One Wins

The W5500 wins everywhere the two cards are directly compared. That includes Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, which cover both graphics and compute APIs. The data shows the W5500 is the clear choice for any workload that uses these APIs, whether it is GPU-accelerated rendering, compute shaders, or machine learning inference that relies on OpenCL or Vulkan compute.

The Pro 555 has no recorded wins in the head-to-head set. Its only theoretical advantage is power consumption: at 75 W it draws less than the W5500's 125 W. But since the Pro 555 is an IGP, that comparison is not meaningful for discrete GPU use cases. The Pro 555's 2 GB memory limit also caps its utility for modern workloads that routinely exceed that capacity. The W5500's 8 GB buffer is far more practical for 3D rendering, video editing, or large dataset compute.

For users constrained to a Mac environment, the Pro 555 might be the only option due to its integration into portable devices. But as a standalone benchmark comparison, the W5500 is categorically superior. The only reason to choose the Pro 555 is platform lock-in, not performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 scores 54302, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 16236. The W5500 leads by 234.5%.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The W5500 records 45615 in Geekbench OpenCL, versus 11682 for the Pro 555. That is a delta of 290.5%, making the W5500 nearly four times faster.

Q: Does the Pro 555 win any benchmark in the head-to-head set?

A: No. The W5500 wins all 3 shared tests (Metal, OpenCL, Vulkan). The Pro 555 records 0 wins.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The W5500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 555 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 81.60 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How do the architectures differ?

A: The W5500 uses RDNA 1.0 on a 7 nm process with 6,400 million transistors. The Pro 555 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm process with 3,000 million transistors.

Q: What is the FP32 compute difference?

A: The W5500 delivers 5.224 TFLOPS, while the Pro 555 delivers 1,305.6 GFLOPS. The W5500 is roughly four times faster.

The Verdict

The data points to an unambiguous conclusion: the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 is the superior card in every measurable way. Its average benchmark score of 15679 places it in the 58th percentile of all GPUs, while the Pro 555's average of 13407 sits in the 54th percentile. That percentile gap is modest, but the head-to-head deltas show the W5500's dominance is concentrated in the APIs that matter for professional work.

The W5500's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti at 0.8% delta, the AMD Radeon R9 M380 at 1%, the AMD Radeon RX 7700 at -1.1%, and the AMD Radeon R9 370X at -1.2%. These are all cards with average scores within about 1% of the W5500, which means it sits in a competitive performance bracket. The Pro 555, by contrast, sits among much weaker company: its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon HD 8950M at 0.2%, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M at 0.4%, the AMD FirePro M6100 at 0.4%, and the NVIDIA P106-090 at -0.5%.

For anyone choosing between these two, the W5500 is the only rational pick if performance matters. The 3:0 win count, the 234% to 290% deltas, the 8 GB versus 2 GB memory, and the 5.224 TFLOPS versus 1.3 TFLOPS FP32 all point the same way. The Pro 555 is a legacy part from 2017, designed for portable Macs, with no benchmark in the shared set where it competes. The W5500, released in 2020 with a launch MSRP of 399 USD, is a discrete workstation card that outperforms the Pro 555 by a wide margin.

The only scenario where the Pro 555 makes sense is if the system requires an integrated GPU with no external power connectors and a 75 W power envelope. But as a benchmark comparison, the W5500 wins outright. There is no workload in the recorded data where the Pro 555 closes the gap, and the architectural differences ensure that gap persists across all API types. Choose the W5500 for compute, for graphics, and for memory capacity. The Pro 555's only advantage is its lower power draw, which is irrelevant for performance-focused applications.