AMD Radeon Pro 560X vs AMD Radeon RX 5500M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 5500M across all three shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 5500M scores 50,359 against the Radeon Pro 560X’s 18,763, a delta of -62.7% from the older part’s perspective. That is not a marginal gap; it is a generational leap in raw compute throughput.

Geekbench OpenCL tells a similar story, with the RX 5500M posting 38,725 versus 9,663 for the Pro 560X. The delta here is -75%, meaning the RX 5500M delivers roughly four times the OpenCL performance of the Pro 560X. For workloads that rely on general-purpose GPU compute, this is the single largest margin in the comparison.

Geekbench Vulkan narrows the gap somewhat, but the RX 5500M still wins by a wide margin: 35,693 against 16,819, a -52.9% delta. Even in its weakest shared test, the RX 5500M is more than double the Pro 560X. The head-to-head table records 0 wins for the Pro 560X and 3 wins for the RX 5500M. There is no benchmark in the database where the older Polaris part comes out ahead.

The average benchmark scores reflect this imbalance. The Pro 560X averages 15,082 across all recorded tests, while the RX 5500M averages 13,356. This is an unusual situation: the RX 5500M wins every shared test but has a lower overall average because its benchmark suite includes several Passmark tests where it scores very low (Passmark DirectX 10 at 39, DirectX 11 at 35, DirectX 12 at 28, and DirectX 9 at 100). These low scores drag down its average despite its dominant Geekbench results.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the data, the RX 5500M is the clear winner for every workload where both GPUs have been tested. The Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan results all favor the Navi-based part, so any application using those APIs will see substantially higher performance on the RX 5500M.

The Pro 560X does not win any recorded benchmark. Its only advantage is indirect: it sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5500M sits at the 54th percentile. This means the Pro 560X is ranked higher in the overall distribution, but that ranking is based on its average score across a smaller benchmark set. In direct comparison, the RX 5500M wins every time.

For users who care about specific API support, the RX 5500M has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 versus 12_0) and a newer Vulkan version (1.4 versus 1.3). The Pro 560X matches OpenGL 4.6, so legacy OpenGL workloads will behave similarly on both parts.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural generations. The Pro 560X uses the Polaris 21 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The RX 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This process shrink is a major factor in the performance gap.

Transistor counts show a massive difference: the Pro 560X packs 3,000 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the RX 5500M crams 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: 24.4 million transistors per mm² for Polaris versus 40.5 million per mm² for Navi. The newer process allows nearly double the density.

Core configurations differ substantially. The Pro 560X has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation units. The RX 5500M has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 5500M also clocks much higher: a 1,375 MHz base clock and 1,645 MHz boost clock, compared to no recorded base or boost clocks for the Pro 560X. The RX 5500M’s game clock is listed at 1,448 MHz.

Memory systems are also different generations. The Pro 560X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 94.08 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on the same 128-bit bus but achieves 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, more than double. Memory clock speeds reflect this: 1,470 MHz (5.9 Gbps effective) for the Pro 560X versus 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the RX 5500M.

Compute rates follow the hardware. The Pro 560X delivers 2.056 TFLOPS FP32 and the same 2.056 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The RX 5500M delivers 4.632 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.265 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The RDNA architecture’s doubled FP16 throughput is a notable difference for workloads that support it.

The RX 5500M also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Pro 560X uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Both are end-of-life products. The Pro 560X was released on July 15, 2018, and the RX 5500M on October 6, 2019. The RX 5500M’s predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, while the Pro 560X has no predecessor recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RX 5500M, with 4.632 TFLOPS FP32 versus 2.056 TFLOPS for the Pro 560X. In FP16, the RX 5500M reaches 9.265 TFLOPS while the Pro 560X stays at 2.056 TFLOPS.

Q: Why does the Pro 560X have a higher percentile rank despite losing every head-to-head test?

A: The Pro 560X sits at the 57th percentile of all GPUs versus the 54th for the RX 5500M. This is because the percentile is based on average benchmark scores across different test sets, and the RX 5500M’s average includes several low Passmark scores that pull it down.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: No. The Pro 560X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 5500M has a higher DirectX feature level and a newer Vulkan version.

Q: How do the memory subsystems compare?

A: Both have 4 GB on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 5500M uses GDDR6 at 224.0 GB/s while the Pro 560X uses GDDR5 at 94.08 GB/s. The RX 5500M’s memory bandwidth is more than double.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units and texture units?

A: The RX 5500M has 1,408 shading units and 88 TMUs, compared to 1,024 shading units and 64 TMUs for the Pro 560X. The RX 5500M also has 32 ROPs versus 16.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life. The Pro 560X launched on July 15, 2018, and the RX 5500M on October 6, 2019.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 5500M is the superior GPU in every measured comparison. Its Geekbench Metal score is 2.7 times higher, its OpenCL score is 4 times higher, and its Vulkan score is 2.1 times higher than the Pro 560X. The RX 5500M also has more shading units, more TMUs, more ROPs, higher clocks, more memory bandwidth, and a newer architecture.

The Pro 560X’s only statistical advantage is its higher percentile ranking, but that is an artifact of its benchmark set. In direct head-to-head tests, it loses all three. For any user choosing between these two parts for gaming, compute, or general GPU acceleration, the RX 5500M is the clear pick.

The RX 5500M’s higher TDP (85 W versus 75 W) is a minor consideration for laptop designs, but the performance gain is substantial enough to justify it. Both parts are end-of-life, so this comparison is mostly relevant for used or refurbished systems. If the choice is between these two, the RX 5500M wins on every recorded metric.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro 560X | AMD Radeon RX 5500M |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Chip | Polaris 21 | Navi 14 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 7 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,000 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 123 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.4M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 1375 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 1645 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not specified | 1448 MHz |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 94.08 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1408 |

| TMUs | 64 | 88 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 16.06 GPixel/s | 52.64 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 64.26 GTexel/s | 144.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.056 TFLOPS | 4.632 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 2.056 TFLOPS (1:1) | 9.265 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 85 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | July 15, 2018 | October 6, 2019 |

| Predecessor | Not specified | Polaris Mobile |