AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs AMD Radeon RX 590 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X compare to the AMD Radeon RX 590 in the Geekbench Metal benchmark?

A: The RX 590 scores 48,407 in Geekbench Metal, while the Pro W5500X scores 27,973. This gives the RX 590 a 42.2% advantage over the Pro W5500X in this specific test.

Q: Which card has the newer architecture?

A: The Pro W5500X uses RDNA 1.0 (Navi 14 chip), while the RX 590 uses GCN 4.0 (Polaris 30 chip). The Pro W5500X is built on a 7 nm TSMC process, whereas the RX 590 uses a 12 nm GlobalFoundries process.

Q: What are the memory differences between these two cards?

A: Both cards have 8 GB of memory, but the Pro W5500X uses GDDR6 with a 128 bit bus width and 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the RX 590 uses GDDR5 with a 256 bit bus width and 256.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 performance rating?

A: The RX 590 delivers 7.119 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is considerably higher than the Pro W5500X's 5.398 TFLOPS FP32 rating. The RX 590's shading unit count of 2304 exceeds the Pro W5500X's 1536 shading units.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of each card?

A: The Pro W5500X launched with an MSRP of 599 USD. The database records the RX 590's launch MSRP as 279 USD.

Q: How do the two cards compare in their overall benchmark percentile rankings?

A: The Pro W5500X sits at the 73rd percentile among all GPUs, while the RX 590 sits at the 70th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 27,973 for the Pro W5500X and 24,744 for the RX 590.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent fundamentally different design philosophies from AMD. The Pro W5500X is built on the Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0 architecture, while the RX 590 uses the Polaris 30 chip with GCN 4.0 architecture. This is not a minor revision; it is a generational shift in how AMD structures the GPU pipeline.

The manufacturing process tells a clear story. The Pro W5500X uses a 7 nm TSMC node, allowing 6,400 million transistors to fit on a 158 mm² die. The RX 590 uses a 12 nm GlobalFoundries process with 5,700 million transistors spread across a much larger 232 mm² die. The transistor density difference is stark: the Pro W5500X packs 40.5 million transistors per mm², while the RX 590 manages only 24.6 million per mm². This is the kind of efficiency gain that the smaller node enables, and it shows up in the power envelope.

The Pro W5500X has a TDP of 125 W with a suggested power supply of 300 W. The RX 590 carries a 175 W TDP and recommends a 450 W power supply. The RDNA part achieves its lower power draw while running at a boost clock of 1757 MHz, which is higher than the RX 590's 1545 MHz boost. Interestingly, the RX 590 has a higher base clock at 1469 MHz versus the Pro W5500X's 1187 MHz base, but the RDNA card boosts more aggressively.

Shader resources are distributed very differently. The RX 590 has 2304 shading units, 144 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The Pro W5500X has 1536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Despite having fewer shading units, the Pro W5500X achieves a higher pixel rate at 56.22 GPixel/s versus the RX 590's 49.44 GPixel/s. The texture rate tells the opposite story: the RX 590 posts 222.5 GTexel/s, while the Pro W5500X delivers 168.7 GTexel/s.

The memory subsystem could not be more different in design. The Pro W5500X uses GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective on a 128 bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 590 uses GDDR5 at 8 Gbps effective on a 256 bit bus, yielding 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 590 wins on raw bandwidth due to the wider bus, but the Pro W5500X uses a newer memory technology. The FP16 capabilities also diverge: the Pro W5500X supports FP16 at 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1 rate), while the RX 590 computes FP16 at 7.119 TFLOPS (1:1 rate), meaning it offers no throughput advantage for half-precision workloads.

The bus interface also marks a clear separation. The Pro W5500X uses Apple MPX, which aligns it with Apple's ecosystem. The RX 590 uses standard PCIe 3.0 x16, making it a general-purpose card. Display outputs differ as well: the Pro W5500X has 2x HDMI 2.0b, while the RX 590 has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The RX 590 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the Pro W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a higher feature level. Vulkan support also differs: the Pro W5500X supports Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 590 supports Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one head-to-head benchmark between these two cards, and it is decisive. In Geekbench Metal, the RX 590 scores 48,407, while the Pro W5500X scores 27,973. The delta is 42.2% in favor of the RX 590. This is not a marginal difference; it is a substantial performance gap in a compute-oriented API.

The RX 590's Metal score is so much higher that it nearly doubles the Pro W5500X's output. The RX 590's Metal score also pushes its average benchmark score to 24,744, which is dragged down by its other benchmark result of 1,081 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The Pro W5500X's entire benchmark portfolio is that single Metal score of 27,973.

The percentile rankings put this in perspective. The Pro W5500X ranks in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs, which is slightly above the RX 590's 70th percentile. This seems counterintuitive given the RX 590's Metal win, but the percentiles are computed across all benchmark results in the database, not just Metal. The RX 590's 3DMark result weighs heavily into its average, and that result is far lower than its Metal score.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides additional context. The Pro W5500X's closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti at 28,020 (0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 7800M at 27,883 (0.3% behind), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 at 27,839 (0.5% behind), and the AMD FirePro S7150 at 28,117 (0.5% ahead). These are tightly clustered scores, suggesting the Pro W5500X sits in a competitive band where small differences matter.

The RX 590's nearest rivals are a different group entirely. The NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile scores 24,763 (0.1% ahead), the Intel Arc A350M scores 24,647 (0.4% behind), the AMD Radeon RX 6600 XT scores 24,442 (1.2% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630 scores 24,277 (1.9% behind). The RX 590's average score of 24,744 places it above three of its four nearest rivals, with only the RTX A5000 Mobile edging it out.

The gap between the two cards in Metal is large enough that even accounting for different benchmark mixes, the RX 590 appears to hold a clear performance advantage in this specific test. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark, and that benchmark belongs to the RX 590.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every major specification. The process node is 7 nm for the Pro W5500X versus 12 nm for the RX 590. The foundry is TSMC for the Pro W5500X and GlobalFoundries for the RX 590. Transistor counts differ: 6,400 million for the Pro W5500X versus 5,700 million for the RX 590. Die size is 158 mm² versus 232 mm², and transistor density is 40.5M per mm² versus 24.6M per mm².

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. Base clocks are 1187 MHz for the Pro W5500X and 1469 MHz for the RX 590. Boost clocks are 1757 MHz for the Pro W5500X and 1545 MHz for the RX 590. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for the Pro W5500X and 2000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the RX 590.

The memory configuration differs in type and bus width. The Pro W5500X uses GDDR6 on a 128 bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 590 uses GDDR5 on a 256 bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. Both have 8 GB capacity. The compute units differ in count: the Pro W5500X has 1536 shading units and 96 TMUs, while the RX 590 has 2304 shading units and 144 TMUs. Both have 32 ROPs.

Pixel and texture throughput differ. The Pro W5500X achieves 56.22 GPixel/s and 168.7 GTexel/s. The RX 590 achieves 49.44 GPixel/s and 222.5 GTexel/s. FP32 is 5.398 TFLOPS for the Pro W5500X and 7.119 TFLOPS for the RX 590. FP16 is 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Pro W5500X and 7.119 TFLOPS (1:1) for the RX 590.

Power requirements are clearly different. The Pro W5500X has a TDP of 125 W and suggests a 300 W PSU. The RX 590 has a TDP of 175 W and suggests a 450 W PSU. The RX 590 has a power connector listed as 1x 8-pin, while the Pro W5500X has no power connector listed. The bus interface is Apple MPX for the Pro W5500X and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the RX 590.

Display outputs differ: the Pro W5500X has 2x HDMI 2.0b, and the RX 590 has 1x HDMI 2.0b plus 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Pro W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 590 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 590 has listed dimensions of 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length, while the Pro W5500X has no dimensions listed. The RX 590's predecessor is listed as Arctic Islands and its successor as Vega. The Pro W5500X has no predecessor or successor listed.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 590 wins clearly in compute throughput. Its FP32 rating of 7.119 TFLOPS exceeds the Pro W5500X's 5.398 TFLOPS by a significant margin. Its texture rate of 222.5 GTexel/s is well above the Pro W5500X's 168.7 GTexel/s. Its memory bandwidth of 256.0 GB/s edges out the Pro W5500X's 224.0 GB/s. And its Geekbench Metal score of 48,407 crushes the Pro W5500X's 27,973 in the only head-to-head benchmark available. The RX 590 also offers more display outputs with three DisplayPort 1.4a connections, which is useful for multi-monitor setups.

The Pro W5500X wins in efficiency and pixel throughput. Its pixel rate of 56.22 GPixel/s exceeds the RX 590's 49.44 GPixel/s despite having half the ROP count of the RX 590. Its FP16 performance of 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) provides a half-precision advantage that the RX 590 cannot match with its 1:1 FP16 implementation. The Pro W5500X consumes 125 W versus the RX 590's 175 W, and it suggests a 300 W PSU versus 450 W. The 7 nm process allows a much smaller die while delivering competitive performance in certain metrics. The Pro W5500X also supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, both higher feature levels than the RX 590's DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

The Pro W5500X's Apple MPX bus interface positions it for Apple ecosystem integration, a use case the RX 590 cannot serve with its PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. The Pro W5500X also has a higher overall percentile ranking at 73rd versus the RX 590's 70th, despite the RX 590's higher Metal score.

The Verdict

The data points in one direction for raw performance: the AMD Radeon RX 590 is the faster card in the recorded benchmark. Its 42.2% advantage in Geekbench Metal is the only head-to-head comparison in the database, and it is a decisive one. The RX 590 also holds advantages in FP32, texture rate, memory bandwidth, and shading unit count. For users prioritizing compute-heavy workloads and standard PCIe compatibility, the RX 590 is the choice backed by the numbers.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X is the pick for users who value efficiency, modern API features, and Apple platform integration. The 7 nm RDNA 1.0 architecture delivers a 125 W TDP and a higher pixel rate with fewer resources, which speaks to a different kind of efficiency. The FP16 2:1 FP16 performance and higher DirectX and Vulkan feature levels position the Pro W5500X for clients that rely on these specifications. Its 73rd percentile ranking also suggests a slightly stronger overall standing among all GPUs.

Users on standard PC hardware should note the RX 590's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface and three DisplayPort outputs. The RX 590's 279 USD launch MSRP and its 1x 8-pin power connector align with mainstream hardware expectations. The Pro W5500X's 599 USD launch MSRP reflects its specialized positioning rather than raw compute dominance.

The RX 590 wins on performance. The Pro W5500X wins on efficiency and platform. The recorded data supports different priorities, and neither card dominates every category.