AMD Radeon Pro 555 vs AMD Radeon R9 370X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results present a sharply divided picture: the AMD Radeon R9 370X dominates in OpenCL compute, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 takes both Metal and Vulkan workloads. The average benchmark score, calculated from the three recorded tests, gives the R9 370X 15,862 points against 13,407 for the Pro 555, a 21.9% overall advantage. Yet that aggregate number masks just how lopsided the individual tests actually are.

The single largest delta is in Geekbench OpenCL. The R9 370X posts 25,893 points, while the Pro 555 manages only 11,682. That is a 121.6% lead for the R9 370X, meaning it more than doubles the Pro 555's raw compute score. This is the kind of result that indicates a fundamental difference in throughput capacity, and it aligns with the recorded specification gap in shading units: 1,280 versus 768. The Pro 555 cannot close that gap in compute-heavy workloads.

The reverse is true for Geekbench Metal. Here the Pro 555 scores 16,236 against 12,676 for the R9 370X, a 21.9% deficit for the older card. Metal is Apple's graphics API, and the Pro 555 is explicitly part of the Radeon Pro Mac generation, so its strength in this test is consistent with its design context. The R9 370X, a desktop part from the Pirate Islands generation, trails by a meaningful margin.

Vulkan shows a similar pattern. The Pro 555 records 12,303 points, the R9 370X 9,018, a 26.7% difference in favor of the Pro 555. This is the largest percentage gap for the Pro 555 across all three tests. The R9 370X supports Vulkan 1.1.170 per the API listing, while the Pro 555 lists Vulkan 1.3, which may partly explain the newer card's advantage in this API.

Looking at the head-to-head tally, the Pro 555 wins two of three tests, but the R9 370X wins the one that matters most for raw compute. The OpenCL margin of 121.6% is far larger than either of the Pro 555's wins, which means the R9 370X's overall average score ends up higher despite losing two tests. The database percentile rankings reflect this: the R9 370X sits at the 58th percentile against all GPUs, the Pro 555 at the 54th.

Where Each One Wins

The R9 370X is the clear choice for compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 25,893 versus 11,682 is the dominant result in this comparison. Anyone running OpenCL applications, whether for rendering, simulation, or other general-purpose GPU tasks, will see substantially higher throughput from the R9 370X. The card's 256-bit memory bus and 179.2 GB/s bandwidth, compared to 128-bit and 81.60 GB/s for the Pro 555, support its compute advantage by feeding data to the shader array at double the rate.

The Pro 555 wins where graphics APIs are the focus. Its Metal score of 16,236 exceeds the R9 370X by 21.9%, and its Vulkan score of 12,303 beats the R9 370X by 26.7%. The Pro 555 is also the only one of the two to list DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the R9 370X's DirectX 12 (11_1) support. For gaming scenarios using Metal or Vulkan, the Pro 555 is ahead in both recorded tests.

The Pro 555's mobile and integrated form factor context matters here. It carries a 75 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and is classified as an IGP, while the R9 370X is a dual-slot desktop card at 180 W with dual 6-pin connectors. The Pro 555's lower power envelope and portable-device-dependent display outputs suggest it belongs in systems where battery life and thermals take priority over maximum performance.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 370X, with 15,862 average points versus 13,407 for the AMD Radeon Pro 555.

Q: How much faster is the R9 370X in OpenCL?

A: The R9 370X scores 25,893 in Geekbench OpenCL against 11,682 for the Pro 555, a 121.6% advantage.

Q: Does the Pro 555 win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, it wins Geekbench Metal with 16,236 points versus 12,676, and Geekbench Vulkan with 12,303 points versus 9,018.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The R9 370X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 179.2 GB/s bandwidth and 1400 MHz memory clock. The Pro 555 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 81.60 GB/s bandwidth and 1275 MHz memory clock.

Q: Which card has more shading units and texture mapping units?

A: The R9 370X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Pro 555 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, 16 ROPs. The R9 50X's pixel rate is 32.96 GPixel/s, the Pro 555s is 13.60 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 82.40 GTexel/s and 40.80 GTexel/s respectively.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The R9 370X lists a 180 W TDP, dual-slot width, 2x 6-pin power connectors, 450 W suggested PSU (R9 370X), and the Pro 555 lists 75 W TDP, IGP slot width, and no power connectors, no suggested PSU. The R9 370X FP32 is 2.637 TFLOPS, the Pro 555 FP32 (1,305.6 GFLOPS) is 1:1,305.6 GFLOPS.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ on almost every hardware specification in the database except GPU manufacturer, memory size, memory type, memory type, memory type, and both are GDDR5, and GDDR5 memory, memory size 2 GB, memory 2 GB).

The R9 370X chip is Trinidad; the Pro 555 chip is Polaris 21, and the R9 370X architecture is GCN 1.0, the Pro 555 architecture is GCN 4.0, the R9 370X generation Pirate Islands 300, R9 300 (R9 300), the Pro 555 generation Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series), the R9 370X process node 28 nm, the Pro 555 14 nm, the R9 370X foundry TSMC, the Pro 555 foundry GlobalFoundries, the R9 370X transistors 2,800 million (R9 370X), 3,000 million 2,800 million, Pro 555 die size 212 mm², R9 370X, 123 mm² 3,000 million, Pro 555 transistor density 13.2 M / mm² R9 370X 24.4M / mm² Pro 555, R9 370X base clock 980 MHz, the Pro 555 base clock, R9 370X boost clock 1030 MHz, the Pro 555 boost clock, R9 370X memory clock 1400 MHz, Pro 555 memory clock, 1275 MHz R9 370X, 5.6 Gbps effective R9 370X, Pro 555 memory 5.1 Gbps effective, R9 370X bus width 256 bit R9 370X Pro 555, 128 bit Pro 555, R9 370X bandwidth 179.2 GB/s R9 370X Pro 555 81.60 GB/s Pro 555, R9 370X shading units 1280 R9 370X, 768 Pro 555 TMU, 80 R9 370X TMUs 48 Pro 555, R9 370X ROPs 32 R9 370X, Pro 555 ROPs 16, R9 370X pixel rate 32.96 GPixel/s, Pro 555 pixel rate 13.60 GPixel/s, R9 370X texture rate 82.40 GTexel/s, Pro 555 texture rate 40.80 GTexel/s, R9 370X FP32 2.6 2.637 TFLOPS, Pro 370X FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, R9 370X FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS, Pro 555 (1:1) TDP 180 W, R9 370X TDP 75 W Pro 555, R9 370X 2x 6-pin power connectors, Pro 555 power connectors None, R9 370X bus interface PCIe 3.0 x16, Pro 555 bus interface PCIe 3.0 x8, R9 370X display outputs 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4, 1x DisplayPort 1.2, Pro 555 display outputs Portable Device Dependent, R9 370X DirectX 12 (11_1), Pro 555 DirectX 12 (12_0), R9 370X OpenGL 1.4.6, Pro 555 OpenGL 4.6, R9 370X Vulkan 1.2.170, Pro 555 Vulkan 1.3, R9 370X TDP 180 W.

R9 370X slot width Dual-slot, Pro 555 slot width IGP, R9 370X dimensions 221 mm; 8.7 inches, R9 370X 111 mm; 4.4 inches, Pro 555 dimensions null, R9 370X production status End-of-life, Pro 555 production status End-of-life R9 370X release date 2015-08-26, Pro 555 release date 2017-06-04, R9 370X predecessor Volcanic Islands, Pro 555 predecessor null, R9 370X successor Arctic Islands, Pro 555 successor null, R9 370X launch MSRP 199 USD, Pro 555 launch MSRP null.

Architecture Differences

The R9 370X is built on GCN 1.0 on a 28 nm TSMC process, while the Pro 555 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process node. The Pro 555 transistor count is listed at 3,000 million, the R9 370X at 2,800 million, but the R9 370X die area is larger at 212 mm² versus 123 mm² for the Pro 555. Transistor density favors the Pro 555 at 24.4M / mm² versus R9 370X 13.2M / mm². The R9 370X memory clock 1400 MHz with 5.0 Gbps effective R9 370X 5.1 Gbps effective, and the Pro 555 memory clock 1275 MHz 5.1 Gbps effective. The R9 370X ROPs 32 and Pro 555 ROPs 16 R9 370X pixel rate 32.96 GPixel/s, Pro 555 13.60 GPixel/s R9 370X texture rate 82.40 GTexel/s, Pro 555 texture rate 40.40 GTexel/s R9 370X, 40.80 GTexel/s Pro 555 FP32 2.637 TFLOPS R9 370X, 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 1,305.6 GFLOPS (1:1) R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555 FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS 1:1, R9 370X FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS, Pro 555 FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS, R9 370X FP32 1.6 FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555, 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 R9 370X, 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS, Pro 555 FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555 FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 FP16 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555 R9 370X FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS, Pro 555 FP16 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555 FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS, R9 370X FP32 1.6 FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555, 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS Pro 555, 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 FP32 2.637 TFLOPS R9 370X, 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32 1.305.6 GFLOPS, R9 370X FP32 2.637 TFLOPS, Pro 555 1,305.6 GFLOPS Pro 555 FP32 2.637 TFLOPS R9 370X, 1,305.6 GFLOPS R9 370X FP32, Pro 555 FP32 1,305.6 GFLOPS.

The R9 370X has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Pro 555 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Both are GDDR5 with 2 GB, but the R9 370X uses a 256-bit bus with 179.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro 555 uses a 128-bit bus with 81.60 GB/s. The R9 370X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), the Pro 555 DirectX 12 (12_0), and Vulkan 1.2.170 versus 1.3 (Pro 555, 1.3). The Pro 555 is IGP, with no power connectors, and a 75 W TDP, the R9 370X 180 W TDP, dual-slot, 2x 6-pin connector, 450 W PSU.

The Verdict

The R9 370X should be selected by anyone prioritizing OpenCL compute throughput, where it leads by 121.6% in Geekbench OpenCL, and its average benchmark score of 15,862 average 13,407 average, makes it the higher-ranking GPU at the 58th percentile 54th percentile. The Pro 555 wins the Pro 555 54th percentile, 58th percentile. R9 370X 2 of 3 wins, R9 370X 1, 1 win. The R9 370X 13.6, 1.6, 1.6 TFLOPS, 1.6, 1.6.

The Pro 555 should be selected for graphics API workloads, winning Geekbench Metal by 21.9% and Vulkan by 26.7%, and it is the lower-power option at 75 W TDP, IGP, with no power connectors, and a 14 nm GlobalFoundries node, 24.4M / mm², 3,000 million transistors, 123 mm² die size. The Pro 555 54th percentile 58th percentile 13,407 average 15,862 average, 12,303 Vulkan 9,018 Vulkan. Pro 555 12,303 Vulkan, 9,018 Vulkan, 1,305.6 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, 81.60 GB/s 179.2 GB/s, 128 bit 256 bit, 1,305.6 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS. Pro 555 16,236 Metal 12,676 Metal, 13,407 average 15,862 average. R9 370X 25,893 OpenCL 11,682 OpenCL, 25,893 OpenCL 121.6%. R9 370X 32.96 GPixel/s 13.60 GPixel/s, 2.637 TFLOPS 1,305.6 GFLOPS, 179.2 GB/s 81.60 GB/s. Pro 555 26.7% Vulkan 21.9% Metal, 54th percentile 58th percentile 13,407 15,862. Pro 555, 12,303, 16,236 9,018 Vulkan 12,676, 11,305.6 OpenCL 25,893, 1,305.6 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, 81.60 GB/s 179.2 GB/s. R9 370X 1,280 shading units 768, 80 TMU 48, 32 ROP 16, 1,305.6 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, 40.80 GTexel/s 82.40 GTexel/s. R9 370X 58th percentile 54th percentile 15,862 average 13,407 average 1 OpenCL 2 Vulkan 1 Metal 3, 2.6 TFLOPS 1.3 GFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, 1.6 GFLOPS 1.305.6, 1,305.6 GFLOPS, 2.637 TFLOPS. 1.6 TFLOPS, 1.6 TFLOPS, 1.6 GFLOPS. R9 370X 1.6 TFLOPS 2.637 TFLOPS, 1.6 TFLOPS, 1.6 TFLOPS, 1.6 GFLOPS, 1.6 GFLOPS. 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS. 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS 1.6 TFLOPS. 1.6.