AMD Radeon Pro W5500X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti Comparison

The GeForce GTX 980 Ti and Radeon Pro W5500X are near-identical in overall benchmark standing, with average scores of 28,020 and 27,973 respectively—a 0.2% gap—yet they achieve parity through entirely different means. The GTX 980 Ti is a 2015 flagship built for raw rasterization throughput, while the W5500X is a 2019 workstation card optimized for Apple’s MPX ecosystem and modern API efficiency. The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench Metal, where the AMD card wins decisively, but the broader specification sheet reveals why these two cards occupy the same 73rd percentile despite six years of architectural separation.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X wins the only direct benchmark comparison available, and it wins by a wide margin. In Geekbench Metal, the W5500X scores 27,973 against the GTX 980 Ti’s 19,520, a 30.2% advantage. This is not a marginal victory; it is a categorical one. Metal is Apple’s graphics API, and the W5500X is explicitly built for Mac Pro systems, with an Apple MPX bus interface and dual HDMI 2.0b outputs. The GTX 980 Ti, by contrast, relies on PCIe 3.0 x16 and offers a legacy DVI port alongside HDMI 2.0 and three DisplayPort 1.2 outputs. For any workload that runs through Metal—which includes most macOS creative applications—the W5500X is the only rational choice between these two.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti wins on raw compute metrics that do not appear in the head-to-head table but are present in the specification data. Its FP32 throughput is 6.060 TFLOPS versus the W5500X’s 5.398 TFLOPS, a 12.3% lead. Its pixel rate is 103.3 GPixel/s versus 56.22 GPixel/s, a 83.8% advantage. Its texture rate is 189.4 GTexel/s versus 168.7 GTexel/s, a 12.3% lead. These numbers matter for OpenCL and Vulkan workloads, where the GTX 980 Ti’s Geekbench OpenCL score of 43,513 and Vulkan score of 47,724 suggest it can leverage its higher shading unit count (2,816 vs 1,536) to pull ahead in non-Metal APIs. The GTX 980 Ti also wins in memory bandwidth, offering 336.6 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, versus the W5500X’s 224.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus, a 50.3% bandwidth advantage that benefits large data transfers and high-resolution texture streaming.

In short: the W5500X wins where Apple’s API stack dominates, and the GTX 980 Ti wins where traditional desktop compute and bandwidth reign.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different semiconductor eras. The GTX 980 Ti uses the GM200 chip, built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture at TSMC’s 28 nm process. The W5500X uses the Navi 14 chip, built on RDNA 1.0 architecture at TSMC’s 7 nm process. This process shrink is stark: the GTX 980 Ti packs 8,000 million transistors into a 601 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.3 million per mm². The W5500X crams 6,400 million transistors into just 158 mm², achieving a density of 40.5 million per mm²—over three times higher. The 7 nm node allows the AMD card to deliver comparable compute with far fewer resources.

Core counts diverge sharply. The GTX 980 Ti has 2,816 shading units, 176 texture mapping units, and 96 ROPs. The W5500X has 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and only 32 ROPs. The latter’s ROP count is one-third of NVIDIA’s, which explains its much lower pixel rate. Clock speeds flip the script: the W5500X boosts to 1,757 MHz versus the GTX 980 Ti’s 1,076 MHz, a 63% higher boost clock. The AMD card also has a higher base clock at 1,187 MHz versus 1,000 MHz. This clock advantage partially compensates for fewer cores, but not fully in rasterization tasks.

Memory configurations differ fundamentally. The GTX 980 Ti uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit interface, running at 7 Gbps effective, delivering 336.6 GB/s. The W5500X uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit interface, running at 14 Gbps effective, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The AMD card has more capacity but less bandwidth. The GTX 980 Ti’s wider bus is a classic high-bandwidth design, while the W5500X’s narrower bus relies on faster memory to stay competitive.

Power profiles are also divergent. The GTX 980 Ti has a 250 W TDP and requires a 600 W suggested PSU, with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors. The W5500X has a 125 W TDP—exactly half—and only needs a 300 W PSU, with no power connectors listed, drawing power from the Apple MPX slot. This makes the AMD card far more power-efficient per unit of compute, though the GTX 980 Ti’s higher absolute performance ceiling justifies its appetite for some users.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The sole head-to-head benchmark is Geekbench Metal, and it is a landslide. The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X scores 27,973 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti’s 19,520, a delta of -30.2% from NVIDIA’s perspective. This means the GTX 980 Ti is 30.2% slower in this test. The result is unsurprising given the W5500X’s RDNA 1.0 architecture, which was designed with modern API efficiency in mind, and its explicit positioning for macOS where Metal is the primary interface.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the GTX 980 Ti posts a Geekbench OpenCL score of 43,513 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 47,724, with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,321. These scores are not directly comparable to the W5500X because the AMD card only has a Metal benchmark in the data. However, the GTX 980 Ti’s average benchmark score of 28,020 is nearly identical to the W5500X’s 27,973, meaning that across all available tests, the NVIDIA card’s non-Metal performance pulls its average up to parity despite the Metal deficit.

If the W5500X had OpenCL or Vulkan scores in the data, the picture might shift, but they are absent. What the data does show is that the W5500X wins the only test both cards share, and it wins by a margin that is difficult to overcome in Apple-centric workflows. The GTX 980 Ti’s wins are inferred from its higher FP32, pixel, texture, and bandwidth figures, but those do not translate into a benchmark victory over the W5500X in the recorded head-to-head.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti has an average benchmark score of 28,020, while the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X has 27,973, a difference of 0.2% in NVIDIA’s favor.

Q: How much faster is the W5500X in Geekbench Metal?

A: The W5500X scores 27,973 versus the GTX 980 Ti’s 19,520, making it 30.2% faster in that specific test.

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

A: The GTX 980 Ti delivers 336.6 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the W5500X delivers 224.0 GB/s over a 128-bit bus, giving NVIDIA a 50.3% bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro W5500X boosts to 1,757 MHz, compared to the GTX 980 Ti’s 1,076 MHz, a 63% higher boost clock for AMD.

Q: Do both cards support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both list DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The W5500X additionally has FP16 performance of 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1), while the GTX 980 Ti’s FP16 is not listed.

Q: What is the TDP of each card?

A: The GTX 980 Ti has a 250 W TDP with a 600 W suggested PSU, while the W5500X has a 125 W TDP with a 300 W suggested PSU.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case. For anyone running macOS or relying on Metal-accelerated applications, the AMD Radeon Pro W5500X is the only defensible pick. Its 30.2% lead in Geekbench Metal is decisive, and its 8 GB of GDDR6 memory exceeds the GTX 980 Ti’s 6 GB for larger working sets. The W5500X’s 125 W TDP and Apple MPX interface also make it the natural fit for Mac Pro systems, where the GTX 980 Ti’s PCIe 3.0 x16 and power connector requirements are mismatched.

For users on Windows or Linux who prioritize traditional compute metrics, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti offers higher FP32 (6.060 vs 5.398 TFLOPS), higher pixel rate (103.3 vs 56.22 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (189.4 vs 168.7 GTexel/s), and significantly more memory bandwidth (336.6 vs 224.0 GB/s). Its OpenCL score of 43,513 and Vulkan score of 47,724 indicate strong non-Metal performance, and its 96 ROPs versus 32 ROPs suggest better fill-rate-bound behavior in games and rasterization workloads.

The overall average scores are virtually tied, but the tie masks divergent strengths. The GTX 980 Ti is the higher-performance card on paper for desktop compute, while the W5500X is the higher-performance card in practice for Apple ecosystems. If the workload is macOS creative production, pick the W5500X. If the workload is Windows/Linux compute or gaming, the GTX 980 Ti’s specification advantages make it the stronger choice. There is no universal winner; there is only the right card for the right environment.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti | AMD Radeon Pro W5500X |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | RDNA 1.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 8,000 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 601 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.3M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1000 MHz | 1187 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1076 MHz | 1757 MHz |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 336.6 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2816 | 1536 |

| TMUs | 176 | 96 |

| ROPs | 96 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 103.3 GPixel/s | 56.22 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 189.4 GTexel/s | 168.7 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 6.060 TFLOPS | 5.398 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not listed | 10.80 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 125 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | None listed |

| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | Apple MPX |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x HDMI 2.0b |

| Release Date | 2015-06-01 | 2019-12-10 |

| Launch MSRP | 649 USD | 599 USD |