AMD Radeon R9 370X vs AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 370X and the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT represent two very different eras of AMD graphics, separated by a full process node jump and a complete architectural rethink. The R9 370X, built on the 28 nm Trinidad chip using GCN 1.0, was a workhorse of the Pirate Islands generation, while the RX 5500 XT, based on the 7 nm Navi 14 chip with RDNA 1.0, arrived four years later as part of the Navi (RX 5000) generation. The benchmark data paints a lopsided picture: across the three shared head-to-head tests — Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan — the RX 5500 XT wins every single one, with deltas ranging from roughly 45% to nearly 80%. Yet the R9 370X still holds a higher average benchmark score (15862 vs 14692) and a marginally better percentile ranking (58th vs 57th percentile among all GPUs), suggesting that the two cards occupy similar overall performance tiers despite the younger card’s dominance in these specific workloads. This contradiction invites a closer look at what each architecture does best, where the numbers diverge, and what the data implies for real-world use.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are unambiguous in their verdict. In the Geekbench Metal test, the RX 5500 XT scores 54842 against the R9 370X’s 12676, a delta of -76.9% from the older card’s perspective — meaning the RX 5500 XT is roughly 4.3 times faster in that specific workload. That is not a marginal improvement; that is a generational obliteration, driven by the RDNA 1.0 architecture’s far more efficient compute scheduling and the 7 nm node’s ability to push clocks much higher.

The Geekbench OpenCL test tells a similar story, though with a smaller gap. The RX 5500 XT posts 46965, while the R9 370X manages 25893, a delta of -44.9%. Still a decisive win, but the margin is narrower, suggesting that OpenCL workloads are less dependent on the architectural advantages that RDNA brings to Metal and Vulkan. The R9 370X’s GCN 1.0 design, with its 1280 shading units and 80 texture mapping units, remains competitive enough in raw compute throughput to avoid a total collapse here.

The widest gap appears in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 5500 XT scores 44191 versus the R9 370X’s 9018, a staggering delta of -79.6%. This is the single most lopsided result in the entire comparison. Vulkan is a low-level API that rewards modern hardware with better draw-call handling and asynchronous compute; the R9 370X, with its 2015-era GCN 1.0 implementation, simply cannot keep pace. The data shows that in Vulkan, the RX 5500 XT is nearly five times faster, which would translate into massive frame-rate advantages in modern games that rely on Vulkan.

Interestingly, the R9 370X’s overall average benchmark score (15862) is higher than the RX 5500 XT’s (14692), despite losing all three head-to-head tests. This is because the average score aggregates a broader set of benchmarks, many of which the RX 5500 XT was never tested on. The head-to-head tests are the only apples-to-apples comparisons available, and they all favor the RX 5500 XT. The nearest rival data for the R9 370X shows it sitting within 1.7% of the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129) and 1% of the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16014), while the RX 5500 XT is within 0.4% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14747) and 2.1% of the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14385). In other words, the R9 370X’s average score places it in a higher-performance peer group, even though its peak single-test performance is far lower.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5500 XT wins everywhere the two cards are directly compared. In Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, it is the clear victor, with the smallest margin being the 44.9% OpenCL gap. For users running compute-heavy tasks that leverage Metal (common in macOS environments or creative apps), the RX 5500 XT’s 54842 score is a massive advantage. For Vulkan-based gaming or workloads, the 79.6% lead makes the RX 5500 XT the only reasonable choice. Even in OpenCL, where the R9 370X’s GCN 1.0 compute units can flex their muscles, the RX 5500 XT’s higher base clock (1607 MHz vs 980 MHz) and boost clock (1845 MHz vs 1030 MHz) simply overwhelm the older card.

The R9 370X’s only “wins” are indirect. Its average benchmark score of 15862 is 7.4% higher than the RX 5500 XT’s 14692, and its percentile rank (58) is one point higher. But these figures are not head-to-head results; they reflect the R9 370X’s performance in a wider set of legacy benchmarks where the RX 5500 XT has no comparable data. If a user relies on older DirectX 9 or DirectX 10 applications, the R9 370X’s GCN 1.0 architecture was designed for that era, and its 32 ROPs and 256-bit memory bus (179.2 GB/s bandwidth) may handle those workloads with fewer driver overhead issues. However, the head-to-head data does not include any legacy API tests, so this remains speculative. What is clear is that in modern, cross-platform APIs, the RX 5500 XT is the only card that wins.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs could hardly be more different under the hood. The R9 370X uses the Trinidad chip, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with 2,800 million transistors packed into a 212 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 13.2M per mm². The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip, also from TSMC, but on a 7 nm process, with 6,400 million transistors in a smaller 158 mm² die — a density of 40.5M per mm², over three times higher. This density advantage is the root cause of the performance gap; more transistors per square millimeter means more compute units, more cache, and more sophisticated logic in the same physical space.

The microarchitectures diverge completely. The R9 370X is GCN 1.0, the original Graphics Core Next design, which prioritized throughput via large numbers of simple cores. It has 1280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, with a peak FP32 rate of 2.637 TFLOPS. The RX 5500 XT is RDNA 1.0, a redesign that emphasizes higher clocks and lower latency per core. It has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, but its FP32 throughput jumps to 5.196 TFLOPS — nearly double the R9 370X — thanks to the 1845 MHz boost clock. The RX 5500 XT also supports FP16 at 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1), which the R9 370X does not list, enabling faster processing in mixed-precision workloads.

Memory is another major differentiator. The R9 370X uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 179.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 5500 XT uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but with a much higher memory clock of 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective), achieving 224.0 GB/s. Despite the narrower bus, the newer memory type gives the RX 5500 XT a 25% bandwidth advantage, which is critical for modern textures and high-resolution assets. The R9 370X’s 2 GB frame buffer is a severe limitation in current games, while the RX 5500 XT’s 4 GB is more practical, though still modest by today’s standards.

Power and connectivity also tell the story of progress. The R9 370X has a TDP of 180 W and requires two 6-pin power connectors plus a 450 W suggested PSU. The RX 5500 XT cuts TDP to 130 W, needs only one 8-pin connector, and runs on a 300 W suggested PSU. The RX 5500 XT also uses PCIe 4.0 x8, doubling the per-lane bandwidth of the R9 370X’s PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Display outputs differ as well: the R9 370X offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the RX 5500 XT has 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a, supporting higher resolutions and refresh rates.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins in the Geekbench Vulkan test?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins decisively, scoring 44191 versus the R9 370X’s 9018, a delta of -79.6% from the R9 370X’s perspective.

Q: Is the R9 370X’s average benchmark score higher than the RX 5500 XT’s?

A: Yes. The R9 370X has an average benchmark score of 15862, while the RX 5500 XT averages 14692. However, the RX 5500 XT wins all three head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the memory bus width difference between the two?

A: The R9 370X uses a 256-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, while the RX 5500 XT uses a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR6. Despite the narrower bus, the RX 5500 XT achieves higher bandwidth at 224.0 GB/s versus 179.2 GB/s.

Q: How do their transistor densities compare?

A: The RX 5500 XT has a transistor density of 40.5M per mm² on a 7 nm process, while the R9 370X has 13.2M per mm² on 28 nm. The RX 5500 XT also packs 6,400 million transistors versus 2,800 million.

Q: Does the RX 5500 XT support FP16 compute?

A: Yes, the RX 5500 XT lists FP16 performance of 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1), while the R9 370X does not list any FP16 capability.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RX 5500 XT boosts to 1845 MHz, compared to the R9 370X’s 1030 MHz. The RX 5500 XT also has a higher base clock at 1607 MHz versus 980 MHz.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for any modern workload. The RX 5500 XT wins every head-to-head benchmark, with margins ranging from 44.9% in OpenCL to 79.6% in Vulkan. It offers double the FP32 throughput (5.196 TFLOPS vs 2.637 TFLOPS), higher memory bandwidth (224.0 GB/s vs 179.2 GB/s), double the VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB), and a lower TDP (130 W vs 180 W) with a smaller physical footprint (180 mm vs 221 mm). For anyone running Metal, Vulkan, or OpenCL applications — which covers most modern games and compute tasks — the choice is the RX 5500 XT, without qualification.

The R9 370X’s sole statistical advantages are its higher average benchmark score (15862 vs 14692) and its percentile rank (58th vs 57th), but these are aggregates over different benchmark suites and do not reflect direct comparisons. In any scenario where both cards run the same test, the RX 5500 XT is faster. The R9 370X might appeal to collectors or users with legacy software that predates RDNA’s driver optimizations, but the benchmark results offer no evidence that it wins any modern test. If a user is constrained to older APIs like DirectX 9 or 10, the R9 370X’s GCN 1.0 heritage could theoretically help, but no head-to-head data supports that claim. The verdict is clear: the RX 5500 XT is the superior card in every measurable head-to-head metric, and the R9 370X should only be considered if the workload is exclusively legacy and the higher average score is somehow more relevant than direct comparisons.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 370X | AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT |

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

| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | 6,400 million |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | 158 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 40.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 980 MHz | 1607 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1030 MHz | 1845 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 1717 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1400 MHz (5.6 Gbps effective) | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 224.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 1408 |

| TMUs | 80 | 88 |

| ROPs | 32 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 32.96 GPixel/s | 59.04 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 82.40 GTexel/s | 162.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.637 TFLOPS | 5.196 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | N/A | 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 180 W | 130 W |

| Power Connectors | 2x 6-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 | 1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | 221 mm (8.7 inches) | 180 mm (7.1 inches) |

| Launch MSRP | 199 USD | 169 USD |