AMD Radeon Pro 555X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN and AMD Radeon Pro 555X represent two very different philosophies in mobile and desktop computing, separated by five years of GPU evolution. The benchmark data reveals a fascinating split: the older desktop flagship crushes the newer mobile chip in raw compute, while the mobile part wins decisively in two of the three tested workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result comes from the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN scores a massive 24,873 compared to the Radeon Pro 555X's 12,628. That is a 97% advantage for the TITAN, meaning it nearly doubles the AMD part's OpenCL performance. This is the kind of delta that defines a compute-class product over a mainstream one.

However, the story reverses sharply in the other two benchmarks. In Geekbench Metal, the AMD Radeon Pro 555X scores 14,479 versus the TITAN's 8,218 — a 43.2% deficit for NVIDIA. The AMD part is not just slightly ahead; it is leading by over 76% of the TITAN's total Metal score. Similarly, in Geekbench Vulkan, the Pro 555X posts 12,855 against the TITAN's 10,027, a 22% win for AMD.

The aggregate picture shows the AMD Radeon Pro 555X winning 2 out of 3 head-to-head tests, yet the NVIDIA card holds a higher average benchmark score overall. The TITAN's average is 14,373, while the Pro 555X averages 13,321. The TITAN's percentile rank of 56 versus the Pro 555X's 54 indicates both sit in the same general performance tier across the entire GPU database, despite their divergent API-specific results.

Architecture Differences

These two GPUs come from completely different architectural eras and design goals. The TITAN is built on NVIDIA's Kepler architecture using the GK110 chip, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 7,080 million transistors onto a 561 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The Pro 555X, in contrast, uses AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture with the Polaris 21 chip, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher density of 24.4 million per square millimeter.

The compute resources differ dramatically. The TITAN fields 2,688 shading units, 224 texture mapping units, and 48 ROPs. The Pro 555X has only 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. That is a 3.5x difference in shader count and a 4.67x difference in TMUs. These raw hardware differences explain the TITAN's massive OpenCL lead.

Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The TITAN uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, delivering 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Pro 555X has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 94.08 GB/s. The NVIDIA card's memory bandwidth is over three times higher, which feeds its larger compute array. Clock speeds show the TITAN running at 836 MHz base and 876 MHz boost, while the Pro 555X's core clocks are not listed in the data, though its memory runs at 1470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective) versus the TITAN's 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective).

The TITAN is a power-hungry dual-slot card requiring both a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector, with a 250 W TDP and a recommended 600 W power supply. The Pro 555X is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) consuming just 75 W with no power connectors and no suggested PSU rating. The TITAN measures 267 mm in length, while the Pro 555X has no listed physical dimensions because it is designed for portable devices.

Where Each One Wins

The TITAN's domain is clearly general-purpose compute. Its OpenCL score of 24,873 is exceptional, and the 97% lead over the Pro 555X shows that applications leveraging OpenCL for tasks like rendering, simulation, or data processing will see nearly double the throughput on the NVIDIA card. The TITAN also offers substantially higher pixel rate (49.06 GPixel/s versus 14.51 GPixel/s) and texture rate (196.2 GTexel/s versus 43.54 GTexel/s), indicating it can handle high-resolution, texture-heavy workloads far more effectively.

The Pro 555X wins where modern API efficiency matters. Its Metal score of 14,479 is particularly telling, as Metal is Apple's low-level graphics API used heavily in macOS applications. The 43.2% deficit for the TITAN suggests that the Kepler architecture's Metal support is poor or that the driver optimizations favor the newer GCN 4.0 design. The Vulkan result (12,855 vs 10,027) also shows the AMD part outperforming by 22%, indicating better modern API utilization despite having far fewer raw compute resources.

The power envelope is another clear differentiator. The Pro 555X's 75 W TDP makes it suitable for thin laptops, while the TITAN's 250 W TDP requires a desktop chassis with robust cooling and power delivery. The TITAN supports PCIe 3.0 x16, while the Pro 555X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, reflecting its integrated nature.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN averages 14,373 across its benchmark suite, compared to the AMD Radeon Pro 555X's 13,321. The TITAN's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 at 14,385 (0.1% difference), while the Pro 555X's closest competitor is the AMD FirePro M6100 at 13,354.

Q: Why does the TITAN have such a large OpenCL lead?

A: The TITAN's OpenCL score of 24,873 versus the Pro 555X's 12,628 reflects a 97% advantage. This correlates with the TITAN's much larger compute configuration: 2,688 shading units versus 768, and 288.4 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 94.08 GB/s.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Metal performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 555X wins Metal decisively, scoring 14,479 against the TITAN's 8,218 — a 43.2% margin. This is the largest single-benchmark gap in either direction.

Q: What are the die size and transistor differences?

A: The TITAN's GK110 chip measures 561 mm² with 7,080 million transistors on a 28 nm process. The Pro 555X's Polaris 21 is 123 mm² with 3,000 million transistors on 14 nm. The AMD part has nearly double the transistor density (24.4M vs 12.6M per mm²).

Q: What is the TITAN's launch MSRP?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN had a launch MSRP of 999 USD. The AMD Radeon Pro 555X has no listed launch MSRP.

Q: Which GPU supports newer API versions?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro 555X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the TITAN supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different use cases. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN is the compute champion, with its 97% OpenCL advantage making it the obvious choice for workloads that stress raw FP32 throughput, texture filtering, or memory bandwidth. Its 4.709 TFLOPS FP32 performance and 288.4 GB/s bandwidth are simply in a different class from the Pro 555X's 1,393.2 GFLOPS and 94.08 GB/s.

The AMD Radeon Pro 555X, despite having roughly one-third the shader count and one-third the memory bandwidth, wins in Metal and Vulkan. This suggests that for modern, low-level APIs, architectural efficiency and driver maturity matter more than raw hardware specifications. The 22% Vulkan win and the 43.2% Metal win are not marginal — they are substantial leads that would be noticeable in real-world applications built on those APIs.

For mobile users on macOS, the Pro 555X is the only viable choice given its 75 W IGP form factor and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The TITAN, with its 250 W TDP, dual-slot cooler, and 267 mm length, cannot exist in that form factor. Conversely, anyone building a desktop workstation in 2013-era hardware with OpenCL-heavy workloads would find the TITAN's performance nearly double that of the AMD part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN | AMD Radeon Pro 555X |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 7,080 million | 3,000 million |

| Die Size | 561 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.4 GB/s | 94.08 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2688 | 768 |

| TMUs | 224 | 48 |

| ROPs | 48 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 49.06 GPixel/s | 14.51 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 196.2 GTexel/s | 43.54 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.709 TFLOPS | 1,393.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | null | 1,393.2 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | null |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2013-02-18 | 2018-07-15 |

| Launch MSRP | 999 USD | null |