AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X and the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT are both end-of-life graphics cards from AMD, but they target entirely different ecosystems and performance tiers. The data shows a single shared benchmark result, but the architectural and specification gaps between the two are vast, making the choice straightforward for most users. The RX 6750 XT is the dominant performer by a massive margin, while the Pro W5500X holds a niche for specific Apple Mac Pro configurations.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is decisively one-sided. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT wins the only head-to-head test available, the Geekbench Metal benchmark, with a score of 137,249 compared to the Pro W5500X's 27,973. This represents a 79.6% lead for the RX 6750 XT, indicating a colossal performance gap in GPU compute and graphics workloads.

The Pro W5500X has no benchmark wins in the provided data. Its strengths lie not in raw performance but in its specific platform integration. It uses the Apple MPX bus interface and is part of the Radeon Pro Mac (Navi Series) generation, making it a purpose-built solution for Apple's Mac Pro systems. Its dual HDMI 2.0b outputs and lower power profile are its practical advantages, but these are not reflected in any performance score.

The RX 6750 XT, by contrast, is a general-purpose consumer card from the Radeon RX 6000 series, built for the PCIe 4.0 x16 interface. It wins on every measurable performance metric, including a Geekbench Vulkan score of 98,089 and a Passmark G3D score of 20,700, solidifying its position as the clear choice for demanding workloads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is fundamental. The Pro W5500X is built on the RDNA 1.0 architecture using the Navi 14 chip, while the RX 6750 XT uses the newer RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 22 chip. Both are manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts and die sizes differ dramatically.

The Navi 14 chip packs 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 40.5M / mm². In contrast, the Navi 22 chip is much larger, containing 17,200 million transistors on a 335 mm² die, with a higher density of 51.3M / mm². This larger, denser chip provides the RX 6750 XT with significantly more resources.

The RX 6750 XT features 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The Pro W5500X is far more modest, with 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Critically, the RX 6750 XT also includes 40 ray tracing cores, a feature completely absent from the RDNA 1.0-based Pro W5500X. The RX 6750 XT also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Pro W5500X is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench Metal test, which is relevant for Apple ecosystem performance. The results are not close. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT scores 137,249, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X scores 27,973. This is a delta of -79.6% for the Pro W5500X, meaning the RX 6750 XT is roughly 4.9 times faster in this specific workload.

This single result defines the entire performance relationship. The RX 6750 XT's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Mobile with an average score of 25,740, placing it in a much higher performance bracket. The Pro W5500X, with its score of 27,973, sits near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (28,020) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839), which are much older or lower-tier products. The data indicates the RX 6750 XT is in a different league, offering a generational leap in compute power.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT has a memory bandwidth of 432.0 GB/s, which is nearly double the 224.0 GB/s of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X have ray tracing cores?

A: No, the data lists no ray tracing cores for the Pro W5500X. The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT, however, is equipped with 40 ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the difference in their bus interfaces?

A: The Pro W5500X uses an Apple MPX bus interface, while the RX 6750 XT uses a standard PCIe 4.0 x16 interface.

Q: Can the Pro W5500X support DirectX 12 Ultimate?

A: No, the Pro W5500X supports DirectX 12 (12_1). DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) support is exclusive to the RX 6750 XT in this comparison.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT has a boost clock of 2600 MHz, significantly higher than the Pro W5500X's boost clock of 1757 MHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Pro W5500X has an average benchmark score of 27,973, while the RX 6750 XT has an average score of 26,011. However, this average is skewed by the RX 6750 XT's multiple lower-scoring DirectX and Passmark tests; in the shared Geekbench Metal test, the RX 6750 XT is vastly superior.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT is the superior graphics card in almost every measurable way. It offers over 4 times the performance in the Geekbench Metal benchmark, has double the memory bandwidth, more than twice the FP32 throughput (13.31 TFLOPS vs 5.398 TFLOPS), and includes modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate support. Anyone building a PC for gaming or high-performance computing should choose the RX 6750 XT without hesitation.

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X is only relevant for a very specific scenario: upgrading or populating an Apple Mac Pro that requires an Apple MPX interface. In that closed ecosystem, the card's compatibility and dual HDMI 2.0b outputs are its primary value. Outside of that niche, its lower core counts, slower clocks, and older architecture make it a poor choice for general use. The verdict is simple: for raw performance, the RX 6750 XT wins decisively; for Apple MPX compatibility, the Pro W5500X is the only option.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro W5500X | AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 14 | Navi 22 |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 17,200 million |

| Die Size | 158 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.5M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1187 MHz | 2150 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1757 MHz | 2600 MHz |

| Game Clock | Not specified | 2495 MHz |

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

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 12 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 2560 |

| TMUs | 96 | 160 |

| ROPs | 32 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | Not specified | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 56.22 GPixel/s | 166.4 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 168.7 GTexel/s | 416.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 5.398 TFLOPS | 13.31 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) | 26.62 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 125 W | 250 W |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | Apple MPX | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 2x HDMI 2.0b | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Dimensions | Not specified | 267 mm / 10.5 inches (length) |

| Release Date | 2019-12-10 | 2022-03-02 |

| Launch MSRP | 599 USD | 549 USD |