AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs AMD Radeon RX 470 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits decisively in favor of the AMD Radeon RX 470. Across the single head-to-head benchmark available, the RX 470 wins outright, and it does so by a substantial margin. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 470 scores 41,690 against the Radeon Pro W5500X's 27,973, a 49% advantage. This is not a marginal victory; it is a dominant one that places the older card in a different performance class for that particular workload.

However, the story is not entirely one-sided. The Radeon Pro W5500X, while losing the head-to-head test, holds its own in broader percentile rankings. The RX 470 sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the W5500X sits just one point behind at the 73rd percentile. This near-identical percentile placement suggests that despite the RX 470's massive win in Metal, the two cards are broadly comparable in overall GPU hierarchy. The W5500X also carries a higher average benchmark score context when compared to its nearest rivals, sitting within 0.5% of cards like the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20, which indicates it is a competent performer in its own right.

The real differentiator is workload focus. The RX 470's win in Metal is notable because Metal is Apple's graphics API, heavily used in macOS applications. Yet the W5500X is explicitly designed for the Mac ecosystem, as its generation label "Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series)" indicates. This creates an interesting inversion: the consumer card beats the professional Mac card in a Mac-centric API test. The data suggests that for raw Metal compute performance, the RX 470 is the stronger choice, while the W5500X's value proposition likely lies elsewhere—perhaps in driver certification, stability, or specific professional application optimizations that do not appear in this particular benchmark suite.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent two distinct generations of AMD graphics architecture, built on different process nodes and with fundamentally different design philosophies. The RX 470 uses the Ellesmere chip based on GCN 4.0 architecture, manufactured on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 5,700 million transistors into a 232 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 24.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the Radeon Pro W5500X uses the Navi 14 chip based on RDNA 1.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This newer node allows 6,400 million transistors in a smaller 158 mm² die, achieving a significantly higher density of 40.5 million per square millimeter.

Clock speeds tell a similar story of generational advancement. The RX 470 has a base clock of 926 MHz and a boost clock of 1206 MHz, while the W5500X runs substantially higher at 1187 MHz base and 1757 MHz boost. Memory configurations also diverge sharply. The RX 470 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 211.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The W5500X uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a narrower 128-bit bus, yet achieves slightly higher bandwidth at 224.0 GB/s thanks to the faster 14 Gbps effective memory speed.

Compute unit layouts differ as well. The RX 470 fields 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The W5500X, despite its newer architecture, has fewer shading units at 1536 and fewer TMUs at 96, while maintaining the same 32 ROPs. This results in different peak rates: the RX 470 achieves 38.59 GPixel/s pixel rate and 154.4 GTexel/s texture rate, while the W5500X reaches higher pixel throughput at 56.22 GPixel/s and higher texture throughput at 168.7 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance favors the W5500X in FP32 at 5.398 TFLOPS versus 4.940 TFLOPS, and it doubles in FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) compared to the RX 470's 4.940 TFLOPS (1:1).

API support separates the two as well. The RX 470 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but nuanced conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 470 is the superior performer in the one benchmark where both cards are directly compared. Its 49% lead in Geekbench Metal is decisive and cannot be explained away by minor architectural tweaks. For any user prioritizing raw Metal compute performance, the RX 470 is the pick.

However, the Radeon Pro W5500X is not without merit. Its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory doubles the RX 470's 4 GB capacity, and its higher bandwidth of 224.0 GB/s versus 211.2 GB/s provides a slight edge in memory-heavy workloads. The W5500X also draws only 125 W TDP, just 5 W more than the RX 470's 120 W, despite running at significantly higher clock speeds. Its 7 nm process node and RDNA 1.0 architecture represent a newer design philosophy that prioritizes efficiency-per-transistor, as evidenced by its 40.5M transistors per mm² versus the RX 470's 24.6M.

From a pure performance-per-benchmark standpoint, the RX 470 wins. From a feature and capacity standpoint, the W5500X offers more memory and a newer feature set. Users who need maximum Metal performance should choose the RX 470. Users who need double the VRAM, higher bandwidth, and a more modern architecture—and who are already in the Mac ecosystem, given the W5500X's Apple MPX bus interface—should consider the W5500X despite its lower benchmark score. The percentile rankings are nearly identical (74th vs 73rd), so neither card is a slouch in the broader GPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Metal?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 470 is significantly faster, scoring 41,690 compared to the Radeon Pro W5500X's 27,973, a 49% advantage.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The RX 470 has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus with 211.2 GB/s bandwidth. The W5500X has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the architecture differences?

A: The RX 470 uses GCN 4.0 on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, while the W5500X uses RDNA 1.0 on a 7 nm TSMC process. The W5500X has a smaller die (158 mm² vs 232 mm²) but more transistors (6,400 million vs 5,700 million).

Q: Which card has higher clock speeds?

A: The W5500X runs at 1187 MHz base and 1757 MHz boost, compared to the RX 470's 926 MHz base and 1206 MHz boost.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: No. The RX 470 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How do the cards compare in overall GPU percentile rankings?

A: The RX 470 sits at the 74th percentile of all GPUs, while the W5500X sits at the 73rd percentile, making them nearly equivalent in overall hierarchy.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench Metal, and the result is emphatic. The AMD Radeon RX 470 posts a score of 41,690, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X manages 27,973. The delta is 49%—the RX 470 does not merely edge ahead; it nearly halves the W5500X's score. This is the kind of margin that changes purchasing decisions.

To contextualize the W5500X's score, consider its nearest rivals. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti scores 28,020, just 0.2% higher, and the AMD Radeon RX 7800M scores 27,883, 0.3% lower. The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 is also close at 27,839, 0.5% lower. This places the W5500X in a tight cluster of mid-to-high-end cards from previous generations, none of which approach the RX 470's Metal performance.

For the RX 470, its nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight competition at a higher level. The AMD Radeon RX 6800M scores 28,874, just 0.4% lower, while the Intel Arc A370M scores 29,175, 0.6% higher. The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and AMD FirePro W8000 are within 0.7% either way. None of these rivals approach the RX 470's Metal score either, reinforcing that the RX 470's 41,690 is an outlier in its peer group for this specific test.

The broader benchmark picture shows the RX 470 also holds a Geekbench OpenCL score of 33,568 and a Vulkan score of 39,884, alongside a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 842. The W5500X has no comparable scores in the data, leaving Metal as the sole point of comparison. This single-data-point limitation means the 49% delta should be interpreted as a strong signal for Metal workloads, but not necessarily indicative of performance in other APIs or applications.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every specification that matters. The RX 470 uses the Ellesmere chip with GCN 4.0 architecture on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process, while the W5500X uses the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture on a 7 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts differ at 5,700 million versus 6,400 million, and die sizes differ at 232 mm² versus 158 mm², yielding transistor densities of 24.6M/mm² and 40.5M/mm² respectively.

Clock speeds favor the W5500X across the board: 1187 MHz base and 1757 MHz boost versus 926 MHz base and 1206 MHz boost. Memory is a generational leap for the W5500X: 8 GB of GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, versus 4 GB of GDDR5 at 1650 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) on a 256-bit bus. Bandwidth slightly favors the W5500X at 224.0 GB/s versus 211.2 GB/s.

Compute resources are mixed. The RX 470 has more shading units (2048 vs 1536) and more TMUs (128 vs 96), but both have 32 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the W5500X at 56.22 GPixel/s versus 38.59 GPixel/s, as does texture rate at 168.7 GTexel/s versus 154.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors the W5500X at 5.398 TFLOPS versus 4.940 TFLOPS, and FP16 is a major differentiator: 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 4.940 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and connectivity also differ. Both are dual-slot with a 300 W suggested PSU, but the RX 470 has a 120 W TDP and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, while the W5500X has a 125 W TDP and no power connector listed. The RX 470 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the W5500X uses Apple MPX. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 470, versus 2x HDMI 2.0b for the W5500X. The RX 470 measures 240 mm in length, 95 mm in height, and 35 mm in width; the W5500X has no listed dimensions. Finally, API support differs in DirectX (12_0 vs 12_1) and Vulkan (1.3 vs 1.4), with both supporting OpenGL 4.6.