AMD Radeon Pro 555 vs AMD Radeon R9 M380 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database results show the AMD Radeon R9 M380 claiming victory in every shared benchmark, though the margins tell a nuanced story. In Geekbench Metal, the R9 M380 posts a score of 18,476 against the Radeon Pro 555's 16,236, a decisive 13.8% advantage. This is the largest gap between the two cards in any test, and it reflects a meaningful edge in compute-heavy workloads that leverage Apple's Metal API. The R9 M380 also wins the Geekbench OpenCL test, scoring 12,565 versus 11,682 for the Pro 555, a narrower 7.6% lead. While the R9 M380 takes both head-to-head matchups, the Pro 555 does have one additional benchmark result in the database, a Geekbench Vulkan score of 12,303, though no corresponding Vulkan result exists for the R9 M380, so no direct comparison can be drawn there.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the R9 M380's mean of 15,521 places it 15.8% above the Pro 555's average of 13,407. This aggregate gap is larger than either individual head-to-head delta, which suggests the R9 M380's overall profile benefits from consistency across its recorded tests. The percentile rankings reinforce the separation: the R9 M380 sits at the 58th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the Pro 555 sits at the 54th percentile. That four-point percentile difference places the two cards in adjacent performance tiers, close enough that real-world application choice may matter more than raw compute potential.

Context from the nearest rivals helps calibrate these scores. The R9 M380's average of 15,521 lands within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti's 15,548, and it is 1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W5500's 15,679. At the same time, it sits 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060's 15,290 and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580's 15,283. This is remarkable company for a mobile GPU from 2015, as the R9 M380 effectively trades blows with desktop-class cards that were released years later. The Pro 555, by contrast, anchors itself in a lower tier. Its 13,407 average is just 0.2% above the AMD Radeon HD 8950M's 13,376, 0.4% above the AMD Radeon RX 5500M's 13,356, and 0.4% above the AMD FirePro M6100's 13,354. It trails the NVIDIA P106-090's 13,470 by 0.5%. In short, the R9 M380 competes with high-end desktop hardware from its era, while the Pro 555 trades within a cluster of midrange mobile parts.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD's Graphics Core Next architecture, and that generational gap shows up in nearly every physical and feature-level specification. The AMD Radeon R9 M380 uses the Strato chip built on GCN 2.0, fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The AMD Radeon Pro 555 uses the Polaris 21 chip on GCN 4.0, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process. The node shrink is substantial, and its effects appear immediately in transistor density. The R9 M380 packs 2,080 million transistors into a 160 mm² die, yielding a density of 13.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The Pro 555 crams 3,000 million transistors into a much smaller 123 mm² die, achieving 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. That is nearly double the density, a direct consequence of the newer process technology.

Despite the architectural leap, the two cards share identical core counts. Both feature 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 render output units. The similarities end there. Clock behavior diverges sharply: the R9 M380 has a base clock of 900 MHz and a boost clock of 1000 MHz, while the Pro 555 lists no base or boost clock in the database, only a memory clock of 1275 MHz with 5.1 Gbps effective data rate. The R9 M380's memory runs at 1500 MHz with 6 Gbps effective. The R9 M380's higher effective memory speed, combined with its 4 GB frame buffer, gives it a memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s across a 128-bit bus. The Pro 555 has just 2 GB of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, yielding 81.60 GB/s. That 14.4 GB/s bandwidth deficit is one of the clearest hardware disadvantages for the Pro 555.

Pixel and texture throughput follow the same pattern. The R9 M380 achieves 16.00 GPixel/s and 48.00 GTexel/s, while the Pro 555 manages 13.60 GPixel/s and 40.80 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance shows the R9 M380 at 1.536 TFLOPS for FP32, while the Pro 555 sits at 1,305.6 GFLOPS, which converts to roughly 1.31 TFLOPS. Notably, the Pro 555 also supports FP16 at 1,305.6 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning it processes half-precision at the same rate as full-precision, a feature the R9 M380 does not list. The Pro 555 additionally supports Vulkan 1.3, while the R9 M380 is limited to Vulkan 1.2.170. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_0) and OpenGL 4.6.

The physical and electrical profiles differ just as much. The Pro 555 is rated at 75 W TDP, uses an integrated form factor (IGP), requires no power connectors, and connects via PCIe 3.0 x8. The R9 M380 has no TDP listed in the database, but its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and mobile discrete design imply a different integration path. The Pro 555's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," confirming its role inside a laptop chassis, whereas the R9 M380's display outputs are not recorded. The R9 M380 launched on May 4, 2015, as part of the Gem System (R9 M300) generation, while the Pro 555 arrived on June 4, 2017, in the Radeon Pro Mac (500 Series) generation.

Where Each One Wins

The R9 M380 dominates in raw compute benchmarks, and the data points to specific strengths. Its 13.8% Metal lead is the headline result, suggesting that applications built on Apple's Metal framework will see a clear advantage on the older card. The 7.6% OpenCL lead extends that advantage to general-purpose GPU compute workloads, including video encoding, image processing, and scientific simulations that rely on OpenCL. The R9 M380's 4 GB frame buffer gives it a substantial capacity advantage over the Pro 555's 2 GB, which matters for texture-heavy workloads, larger render targets, and datasets that exceed 2 GB. The R9 M380 also wins on memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s versus 81.60 GB/s), pixel fill rate (16.00 GPixel/s versus 13.60 GPixel/s), and texture fill rate (48.00 GTexel/s versus 40.80 GTexel/s). For anyone running GPU-bound tasks that scale with bandwidth or fill rate, the R9 M380 is the stronger choice.

The Pro 555, however, has its own areas of advantage, and they are architectural rather than performance-based. Its 14 nm process and 24.4M / mm² transistor density make it the more modern design, and the 75 W TDP rating means it fits in power-constrained systems. The FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio is a meaningful feature for workloads that use half-precision arithmetic, such as certain machine learning inference tasks or image processing pipelines, and the R9 M380 has no listed FP16 capability at all. The Pro 555 also exposes Vulkan 1.3, a newer API version than the R9 M380's Vulkan 1.2.170, which could matter for compatibility with newer Vulkan-based applications. The 2 GB memory size is a limitation, but for basic laptop use cases, the lower power draw and integrated form factor are practical wins.

In terms of raw score, the Pro 555's Vulkan result of 12,303 is its best single benchmark, but it cannot be compared directly to the R9 M380 due to missing data. The Pro 555's Metal and OpenCL scores are both lower than the R9 M380's, which means the newer card loses every direct comparison available in the database. The nearest-rival data reinforces the tier split: the R9 M380 sits alongside the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2060, while the Pro 555 sits alongside the RX 5500M and FirePro M6100. That is a two-tier gap, not a marginal one.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon R9 M380 is the clear winner on pure performance. It beats the Radeon Pro 555 by 13.8% in Metal, 7.6% in OpenCL, and 15.8% on average benchmark score. It has double the memory, higher bandwidth, faster fill rates, and a stronger nearest-rival position, trading with desktop-class GPUs like the GTX 1080 Ti and RTX 2060. For any workload that stresses compute, memory capacity, or fill rate, the R9 M380 is the card to choose.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555 wins on architecture and efficiency. It is built on a newer 14 nm process, packs 3,000 million transistors into a 123 mm² die, supports FP16 at full rate, offers Vulkan 1.3, and draws only 75 W. Its integrated form factor and lack of power connectors make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the R9 M380's discrete design would not fit. The Pro 555's percentile rank of 54 versus the R9 M380's 58 means it is not far behind in the broader GPU landscape, but in direct head-to-head tests, it loses every time.

The verdict depends on the use case. If the priority is peak performance for GPU compute, Metal-based applications, or memory-intensive tasks, the R9 M380 is the superior part. If the priority is modern feature support, power efficiency, and half-precision compute, the Pro 555 is the more forward-looking choice despite its lower scores. The database shows a clear performance hierarchy, but it also shows two cards designed for different purposes, one built to push frame rates and compute numbers, the other built to deliver capable performance within a tight power envelope.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R9 M380 has an average benchmark score of 15,521, while the AMD Radeon Pro 555 scores 13,407, a gap of 15.8% in favor of the R9 M380.

Q: How do the two cards compare in Geekbench Metal?

A: The R9 M380 scores 18,476 in Geekbench Metal, beating the Pro 555's 16,236 by 13.8%. This is the largest head-to-head margin between the two cards.

Q: Does the Radeon Pro 555 support any features that the R9 M380 lacks?

A: Yes, the Pro 555 supports FP16 at 1,305.6 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the R9 M380 has no listed FP16 capability. The Pro 555 also supports Vulkan 1.3, whereas the R9 M380 supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: What is the memory configuration of each card?

A: The R9 M380 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro 555 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 81.60 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How does the R9 M380 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The R9 M380's average score of 15,521 is within 0.2% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti's 15,548, 1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W5500's 15,679, 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060's 15,290, and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 580's 15,283.

Q: How does the Pro 555 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Pro 555's average score of 13,407 is 0.2% above the AMD Radeon HD 8950M's 13,376, 0.4% above the AMD Radeon RX 5500M's 13,356, 0.4% above the AMD FirePro M6100's 13,354, and 0.5% below the NVIDIA P106-090's 13,470.