AMD Radeon Pro W5500 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT and AMD Radeon Pro W5500 represent two distinct generations of AMD graphics technology, and the benchmark data reveals a decisive performance gap. Across the nine head-to-head benchmarks, the RX 7600 XT wins every single test, with victory margins ranging from a modest 15.1% to a staggering 198.2%. This is not a close contest; it is a generational sweep. The data shows the RX 7600 XT delivers an average benchmark score of 17,083 compared to the Pro W5500's 15,679, placing the newer card in the 60th percentile of all GPUs versus the Pro W5500's 58th percentile. While both cards are near their respective rival clusters, the RX 7600 XT's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 (with a delta of -0.7%), while the Pro W5500 sits just 0.8% above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, illustrating the vast performance tier difference between these two AMD offerings.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided victory for the RX 7600 XT comes in the Passmark DirectX 11 test, where it scores 167 against the Pro W5500's 56, representing a 198.2% advantage. This nearly triples the older card's performance in a legacy API workload, suggesting the architectural improvements in the newer RDNA 3.0 design provide substantial benefits even in older rendering paths. Similarly, the Passmark DirectX 10 test shows an 80.9% lead (85 vs 47), and the DirectX 9 test reveals an 81% advantage (228 vs 126), indicating consistent superiority across all DirectX generations.

The compute-oriented benchmarks tell a similar story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7600 XT produces a score of 92,426, which is 102.6% higher than the Pro W5500's 45,615 — effectively doubling the compute output. The Passmark GPU Compute test reinforces this with an 87.1% lead (8,987 vs 4,804). The raw rasterization performance, measured by Passmark G3D, shows a 90.8% advantage (17,132 vs 8,978), nearly doubling the Pro W5500's score. Even in the Vulkan API, where the gap is narrowest, the RX 7600 XT still leads by 15.1% (48,366 vs 42,021), demonstrating that the newer card's advantages persist even in modern, low-level APIs where the older card is relatively stronger.

The least dramatic difference appears in the Passmark G2D test, a 2D graphics workload, where the RX 7600 XT leads by 27.8% (1,030 vs 806). This smaller margin suggests that 2D performance is less dependent on the architectural leaps that benefit 3D and compute tasks. Notably, the Pro W5500 has a Geekbench Metal score of 54,302, a benchmark not run on the RX 7600 XT, making it the only test where the older card has data without a direct comparison. The overall pattern is unambiguous: the RX 7600 XT wins 9 out of 9 comparable tests, with an average delta of approximately 83.3% across all benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The fundamental divide between these two cards lies in their underlying architectures. The RX 7600 XT is built on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, specifically the Navi 33 chip (codename "Hotpink Bonefish"), while the Pro W5500 uses the first-generation RDNA 1.0 architecture on the Navi 14 chip. This generational leap is reflected in the manufacturing process: the RX 7600 XT uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, whereas the Pro W5500 uses a 7 nm process. The smaller node allows the RX 7600 XT to pack 13,300 million transistors onto a 204 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 65.2 million per mm². In contrast, the Pro W5500 contains only 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, with a density of 40.5 million per mm². This means the RX 7600 XT has more than double the transistors in only 29% more die area.

The compute resources diverge dramatically. The RX 7600 XT features 2,048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 64 render output units (ROPs), compared to the Pro W5500's 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The newer card also includes 32 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro W5500, which has no ray tracing hardware. This explains the RX 7600 XT's support for DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus the Pro W5500's DirectX 12 (12_1) — the newer API tier requires ray tracing and mesh shaders, which only the RDNA 3.0 card can provide.

Clock speeds further widen the gap. The RX 7600 XT operates at a base clock of 1980 MHz, a game clock of 2470 MHz, and a boost clock of 2755 MHz. The Pro W5500, by contrast, runs at a base of 1744 MHz and boosts to only 1855 MHz. This 900 MHz boost clock difference, combined with the additional shading units, explains why the RX 7600 XT achieves 22.57 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus just 5.224 TFLOPS for the Pro W5500 — a 4.3x advantage in raw floating-point throughput. The FP16 capabilities also differ in nature: the RX 7600 XT offers 22.57 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the Pro W5500 provides 10.45 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, indicating different design priorities for compute workloads.

Where Each One Wins

Given the RX 7600 XT's sweep of all nine head-to-head benchmarks, identifying where the Pro W5500 wins requires examining the data more carefully. The Pro W5500's only recorded benchmark without a direct comparison is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 54,302 — a strong result that suggests it may handle Apple's Metal API efficiently, though this is not a test the RX 7600 XT participated in. In terms of physical design, the Pro W5500 is a single-slot card, making it more suitable for dense multi-GPU workstation configurations, while the RX 7600 XT requires dual-slot spacing. The Pro W5500 also consumes less power at 125 W TDP versus 190 W, and requires only a 300 W PSU recommendation versus the RX 7600 XT's 450 W suggestion, making it more power-efficient per slot.

The RX 7600 XT wins decisively in every measurable performance category. Its 16 GB of GDDR6 memory doubles the Pro W5500's 8 GB, and while both use a 128-bit bus, the RX 7600 XT's memory runs at 18 Gbps effective (2250 MHz) yielding 288.0 GB/s bandwidth versus the Pro W5500's 14 Gbps (1750 MHz) providing 224.0 GB/s. The newer card also offers more modern display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1, compared to the Pro W5500's 4x DisplayPort 1.4a. For gaming and general-purpose graphics, the RX 7600 XT is categorically superior. For professional workloads that rely on OpenCL or Vulkan compute, the data shows the RX 7600 XT delivers 102.6% and 15.1% higher scores, respectively. The Pro W5500's edge is limited to its single-slot form factor and lower power requirements, which could be decisive in specialized server or multi-GPU environments where space and power are constrained.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RX 7600 XT in the most common graphics benchmark?

A: In the Passmark G3D test, the RX 7600 XT scores 17,132 versus the Pro W5500's 8,978, a 90.8% advantage — nearly double the performance.

Q: Does the Pro W5500 win any benchmark against the RX 7600 XT?

A: No. Across all nine comparable benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL, Geekbench Vulkan, and seven Passmark tests), the RX 7600 XT wins every single one, with margins from 15.1% to 198.2%.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The Passmark DirectX 11 test shows the largest delta at 198.2% (167 vs 56), indicating the RX 7600 XT is nearly three times faster in that legacy API workload.

Q: Do both cards support the same level of DirectX?

A: No. The RX 7600 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which includes ray tracing and mesh shaders, while the Pro W5500 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and lacks ray tracing hardware entirely.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The RX 7600 XT has 16 GB of GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro W5500 has 8 GB of GDDR6 with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Q: Are there any physical design differences that matter?

A: Yes. The Pro W5500 is single-slot with a 125 W TDP and 1x 6-pin connector, while the RX 7600 XT is dual-slot with a 190 W TDP and 1x 8-pin connector. The Pro W5500 also has a longer board at 241 mm versus 204 mm for the RX 7600 XT.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT | AMD Radeon Pro W5500 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1980 MHz | 1744 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2755 MHz | 1855 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2470 MHz | None |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 8 GB |

| Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1408 |

| TMUs | 128 | 88 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 176.3 GPixel/s | 59.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 352.6 GTexel/s | 163.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 22.57 TFLOPS | 5.224 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 22.57 TFLOPS (1:1) | 10.45 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 190 W | 125 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (12_1) |

| Dimensions (L x H) | 204 mm x 115 mm | 241 mm x 111 mm |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-01-23 | 2020-02-09 |

| Launch MSRP | 329 USD | 399 USD |

The Verdict

The data presents an overwhelming case for the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT. It wins all nine head-to-head benchmarks, with an average score of 17,083 versus 15,679 for the Pro W5500. The newer card delivers double the FP32 compute performance (22.57 TFLOPS vs 5.224 TFLOPS), double the memory capacity (16 GB vs 8 GB), and a 28.6% bandwidth advantage (288.0 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s). It also introduces ray tracing support, a feature the Pro W5500 completely lacks, and supports the more advanced DirectX 12 Ultimate API. For any user prioritizing raw graphics performance, compute throughput, or modern feature support, the RX 7600 XT is the clear choice.

However, the Pro W5500 retains relevance in specific professional scenarios. Its single-slot design allows for higher-density GPU installations in workstations or servers where space is at a premium. Its lower 125 W TDP and 300 W PSU recommendation make it easier to integrate into power-constrained systems. The Pro W5500 is also end-of-life, whereas the RX 7600 XT is still in active production. For users running legacy professional applications that are optimized for the Pro series' specific driver stack or that require Metal API support (where the Pro W5500 scores 54,302 in Geekbench Metal), the older card may still serve a purpose. But for anyone choosing between these two based on benchmark performance, the RX 7600 XT is categorically superior, offering 90.8% higher G3D performance, 102.6% higher OpenCL performance, and 87.1% higher GPU compute performance. The verdict is unambiguous: the RX 7600 XT is the superior graphics processor in nearly every measurable way, and the Pro W5500's only advantages lie in its physical form factor and power efficiency, not its performance.