AMD Radeon Pro W5500 vs AMD Radeon RX 7600S Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 7600S and AMD Radeon Pro W5500 are two very different mobile and desktop graphics solutions separated by three years of architecture evolution. The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the newer RX 7600S, which wins 8 of 9 head-to-head tests, but the Pro W5500 holds one notable advantage in 2D workloads. The RX 7600S delivers dramatically higher raw compute and DirectX performance, while the Pro W5500 counters with a marginal lead in 2D graphics throughput and a more established desktop form factor.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the comparison comes from Passmark DirectX 11 testing, where the RX 7600S scores 140 against the Pro W5500's 56. That is a 150% deltaPct advantage, meaning the newer card delivers two and a half times the performance in this legacy API workload. DirectX 12 shows a similar if less extreme pattern: 65 versus 39, a 66.7% lead for the RX 7600S. DirectX 9 and DirectX 10 also favor the RX 7600S by 67.5% and 57.4% respectively, with scores of 211 versus 126 and 74 versus 47. The consistency across all DirectX versions indicates the RX 7600S has a fundamentally stronger graphics pipeline, not just an advantage in one specific API.

In Vulkan, the gap widens further. The RX 7600S posts 73868 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Pro W5500 manages 42021. That is a 75.8% deltaPct, the second-largest margin in the entire comparison. OpenCL follows the same trend but with a smaller spread: 68012 versus 45615, a 49.1% lead. These compute-oriented results suggest the RX 7600S is not only faster at rasterization but also substantially more capable in general-purpose GPU workloads. The Passmark GPU Compute test reinforces this, showing 6520 versus 4804, a 35.7% advantage.

The single most important aggregate metric, Passmark G3D, gives the RX 7600S a 15408 score against 8978 for the Pro W5500. That is a 71.6% deltaPct, placing the RX 7600S in a completely different performance tier. The Pro W5500's only win comes in Passmark G2D, where it scores 806 versus 776, a narrow 3.7% margin. This 2D advantage is real but minor, and it does not offset the massive deficits everywhere else. The overall benchmark average reinforces the hierarchy: the RX 7600S averages 16696 across all tests, while the Pro W5500 averages 15679. Interestingly, the Pro W5500's nearest rival list includes the GeForce GTX 1080 Ti with a deltaPct of 0.8%, suggesting the older card sits near that legendary GPU in overall performance, but the RX 7600S sits closer to the NVIDIA T400 4 GB at -0.6% deltaPct, a much lower-tier competitor.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7600S is built on RDNA 3.0 architecture using the Navi 33 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm TSMC process. The Pro W5500 uses RDNA 1.0 with the Navi 14 chip on a 7 nm TSMC node. This process shrink from 7 nm to 6 nm allows the RX 7600S to pack 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Pro W5500 has 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, for a density of just 40.5M per mm². The RX 7600S therefore has more than double the transistor count and roughly 29% higher density, which explains its substantial compute advantage.

The RX 7600S features 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, plus 28 ray tracing cores. The Pro W5500 has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and only 32 ROPs, with no ray tracing cores at all. The shading unit advantage is 27%, but the ROP advantage is a massive 100% in favor of the RX 7600S. This ROP difference directly contributes to the pixel rate gap: the RX 7600S achieves 140.8 GPixel/s versus 59.36 GPixel/s for the Pro W5500, a 137% improvement. Texture rate follows suit at 246.4 GTexel/s versus 163.2 GTexel/s, a 51% lead.

FP32 compute tells the most striking story. The RX 7600S delivers 15.77 TFLOPS, while the Pro W5500 manages only 5.224 TFLOPS. That is roughly three times the raw floating-point throughput, which explains the OpenCL and compute benchmark results. FP16 performance scales similarly: 31.54 TFLOPS versus 10.45 TFLOPS, both at 2:1 ratio. Clock speeds differ in an interesting way: the Pro W5500 has a higher base clock at 1744 MHz versus 1500 MHz, but the RX 7600S boosts higher to 2200 MHz versus 1855 MHz. The RX 7600S also has a game clock of 1865 MHz, a feature the Pro W5500 lacks entirely.

Memory configurations are similar on paper but differ in bandwidth. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 7600S runs at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, yielding 256.0 GB/s. The Pro W5500 runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, giving 224.0 GB/s. The RX 7600S therefore has 14.3% more memory bandwidth. Power and form factor differences are stark: the RX 7600S is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 75 W TDP and no power connectors, while the Pro W5500 is a single-slot desktop card with a 125 W TDP and a 1x 6-pin connector, requiring a 300 W power supply. The Pro W5500 also has a fixed 241 mm length and 111 mm height, while the RX 7600S dimensions are portable-device dependent.

The Verdict

The data strongly favors the AMD Radeon RX 7600S for anyone prioritizing 3D graphics, compute workloads, or modern API support. It wins every meaningful benchmark by margins ranging from 35.7% to 150%, and its architectural advantages in ROPs, shading units, ray tracing, and process node are overwhelming. The RX 7600S also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Pro W5500 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1) and also Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7600S is in active production, whereas the Pro W5500 is end-of-life.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 makes sense only for very specific use cases where its 2D performance edge (806 versus 776 in Passmark G2D) and desktop form factor matter more than 3D capability. It also has a lower average benchmark score of 15679 versus 16696, meaning even its own aggregate performance trails the RX 7600S by 6.5%. The Pro W5500's launch MSRP was 399 USD, but that figure does not reflect current availability or relative value. The RX 7600S has no launch MSRP listed, so no price comparison is possible from the data.

For general gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU compute, the RX 7600S is the clear choice based on every available metric. The Pro W5500 retains a niche for 2D desktop workflows or legacy compatibility, but its 58th percentile ranking versus the RX 7600S's 60th percentile shows they sit close in the overall GPU distribution, with the RX 7600S holding the edge.

Specification Differences

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

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Chip | Navi 33 | Navi 14 |

| 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 | 1500 MHz | 1744 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz | 1855 MHz |

| Game Clock | 1865 MHz | None |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1792 | 1408 |

| TMUs | 112 | 88 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 28 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 140.8 GPixel/s | 59.36 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 246.4 GTexel/s | 163.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 15.77 TFLOPS | 5.224 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 31.54 TFLOPS | 10.45 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 125 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | None | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

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

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2020-02-09 |

| Length | None | 241 mm (9.5 inches) |

| Height | None | 111 mm (4.4 inches) |

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600S wins 8 out of 9 head-to-head benchmark tests. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500 wins only 1 test, which is Passmark G2D.

Q: How much faster is the RX 7600S in DirectX 11?

A: The RX 7600S scores 140 in Passmark DirectX 11, while the Pro W5500 scores 56. This represents a 150% deltaPct advantage for the RX 7600S, the largest margin in any test.

Q: Does the Pro W5500 have any ray tracing capability?

A: No, the Pro W5500 has no ray tracing cores listed. The RX 7600S includes 28 ray tracing cores, which is a key architectural difference.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 7600S has 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the Pro W5500 has 224.0 GB/s. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 7600S has faster effective memory speed at 16 Gbps versus 14 Gbps.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 7600S has a boost clock of 2200 MHz, which is higher than the Pro W5500's 1855 MHz. However, the Pro W5500 has a higher base clock at 1744 MHz versus 1500 MHz.

Q: Are both GPUs in active production?

A: No, the RX 7600S is listed as Active, while the Pro W5500 is listed as End-of-life. The Pro W5500 was released on 2020-02-09, and the RX 7600S on 2023-01-03.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7600S wins decisively in every 3D graphics and compute scenario. Its 71.6% lead in Passmark G3D makes it the superior choice for gaming, 3D rendering, and any workload that stresses the graphics pipeline. The 150% DirectX 11 advantage and 66.7% DirectX 12 lead mean legacy titles and modern games alike run significantly better. The 75.8% Vulkan deltaPct and 49.1% OpenCL deltaPct position it as the clear pick for compute-heavy applications like machine learning inference or GPU-accelerated rendering. The 35.7% Passmark GPU Compute win further confirms this. With 28 ray tracing cores, the RX 7600S also supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing, something the Pro W5500 cannot do at all. Its 75 W TDP and IGP form factor make it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency is paramount.

The Pro W5500 has exactly one benchmark victory: Passmark G2D with 806 versus 776, a 3.7% margin. This suggests it handles 2D desktop composition, window management, and basic image manipulation slightly better. Its single-slot desktop form factor with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs makes it a practical choice for multi-monitor professional setups where 2D accuracy matters more than 3D speed. The 125 W TDP and 300 W suggested PSU indicate it is designed for desktop workstations rather than portable devices. Its RDNA 1.0 architecture and 7 nm process are older, but the higher base clock of 1744 MHz means it starts from a faster idle point. For users who never touch 3D applications and need a reliable desktop card with multiple DisplayPort outputs, the Pro W5500's 2D edge and established desktop interface give it a narrow but real niche. For everyone else, the RX 7600S is the statistically superior product across nearly every measurable dimension.