AMD Radeon RX 550 vs AMD Radeon RX 5500M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M records an average benchmark score of 13356, while the AMD Radeon RX 550 scores 11075. That places the RX 5500M roughly 20.6% higher overall, though the RX 550 sits at the 50th percentile versus the RX 5500M's 54th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Geekbench Metal performance?

A: The RX 5500M posts 50359 in Geekbench Metal, versus 20838 for the RX 550. This gives the RX 5500M a 141.7% lead, making it the clear winner in Apple's Metal API test.

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

A: The RX 5500M offers 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth with 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus. The RX 550 provides 112.0 GB/s with 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, also on a 128-bit bus. The RX 5500M doubles the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The RX 5500M uses a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 550 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The smaller node contributes to higher transistor density for the RX 5500M.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products. The RX 5500M was released on October 6, 2019, and the RX 550 was released on April 19, 2017.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 5500M has a TDP of 85 W, while the RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W. The RX 550 also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, whereas the RX 5500M does not specify a suggested PSU.

Architecture Differences

The RX 5500M and RX 550 belong to entirely different architectural generations. The RX 5500M is built on RDNA 1.0, the first iteration of AMD's RDNA architecture, using the Navi 14 chip. The RX 550, in contrast, uses GCN 4.0 with the Lexa chip, part of the Polaris family.

The manufacturing process separates them further. The RX 5500M is fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC, packing 6,400 million transistors into a 158 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 40.5 million per square millimeter. The RX 550 uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, giving a density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The RX 5500M crams nearly twice the transistors per area.

Shader resources differ dramatically. The RX 5500M houses 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RX 550 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the RX 5500M carries 2.75 times the shaders and TMUs, and double the ROPs.

Memory architecture also diverges. The RX 5500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 with 14 Gbps effective speed, while the RX 550 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 at 7 Gbps effective. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the faster memory on the RX 5500M delivers 224.0 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s.

Compute rates follow the hardware. The RX 5500M reaches 4.632 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.265 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The RX 550 manages 1,211.4 GFLOPS FP32 and the same 1,211.4 GFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). The RX 5500M is roughly 3.8 times faster in FP32.

API support differs subtly. Both support DirectX 12, but the RX 5500M implements 12_1 while the RX 550 implements 12_0. Vulkan support is 1.4 on the RX 5500M versus 1.3 on the RX 550. OpenGL is 4.6 on both.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5500M wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database. In Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan tests, it leads decisively. The RX 550 does not record a single victory in the recorded comparisons.

For users prioritizing raw compute and modern API performance, the RX 5500M is the stronger choice. Its RDNA architecture and GDDR6 memory provide substantial advantages in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. The 4 GB frame buffer also allows for higher-resolution textures compared to the RX 550's 2 GB.

The RX 550 has its own niche. Its 50 W TDP makes it a lower-power option, and it comes in a dual-slot form factor with a 145 mm length. It also offers display outputs including 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, which is useful for desktop setups. The RX 5500M, being a mobile part, has display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent."

The RX 550 also benefits from a wider range of benchmark data in certain areas. It has a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 127, a test the RX 5500M does not have recorded. The RX 550 also has PassMark scores across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and compute, whereas the RX 5500M only has PassMark data for those same tests but no 3DMark result.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the RX 550's PassMark DirectX 9 score of 100 (out of the recorded scale) and DirectX 10 score of 39 suggest it can handle older titles adequately. The RX 5500M's PassMark DirectX 9 score is also 100, so they tie in that specific test, while the RX 5500M leads in DirectX 10 (39 vs. the RX 550's 39? No, the RX 5500M scores 39 in DirectX 10 and the RX 550 has no DirectX 10 score in the head-to-head data).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every core specification.

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 5500M | AMD Radeon RX 550 |

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

| Process node | 7 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 2,200 million |

| Die size | 158 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Base clock | 1375 MHz | 1100 MHz |

| Boost clock | 1645 MHz | 1183 MHz |

| Memory clock | 14 Gbps effective | 7 Gbps effective |

| Memory size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 112.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1408 | 512 |

| TMUs | 88 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 52.64 GPixel/s | 18.93 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 144.8 GTexel/s | 37.86 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 4.632 TFLOPS | 1,211.4 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 9.265 TFLOPS (2:1) | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 85 W | 50 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

The RX 5500M also has a game clock of 1448 MHz, a feature the RX 550 does not list. The RX 550 includes a suggested PSU of 250 W and a dual-slot design, neither of which appears for the RX 5500M.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records three direct comparisons between the RX 5500M and RX 550, all in Geekbench tests. The RX 5500M wins all three.

Geekbench Metal shows the largest absolute gap. The RX 5500M scores 50359, while the RX 550 scores 20838. That is a delta of 141.7% in favor of the RX 5500M. This test reflects raw compute throughput in Metal, and the RX 5500M's RDNA architecture with 1408 shaders at 1645 MHz boost clearly overwhelms the RX 550's 512 shaders at 1183 MHz.

Geekbench OpenCL shows an even larger relative difference. The RX 5500M scores 38725 against the RX 550's 11063, a 250% lead. This is the biggest percentage margin in the head-to-head set. OpenCL workloads often scale with shader count and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the RX 5500M substantially.

Geekbench Vulkan follows a similar pattern. The RX 5500M scores 35693, and the RX 550 scores 12270, giving a 190.9% advantage to the RX 5500M. Vulkan performance benefits from the newer architecture and faster memory subsystem.

These results align with the average benchmark scores. The RX 5500M's 13356 average is 20.6% higher than the RX 550's 11075. The nearest rivals for the RX 5500M include the AMD FirePro M6100 (13354, 0% delta), the AMD Radeon HD 8950M (13376, -0.1% delta), and the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13321, 0.3% delta). The RX 550's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (11088, -0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (11047, 0.3% delta), and the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225, -1.3% delta).

The RX 5500M's PassMark scores provide additional context. It scores 5848 in PassMark G3D, 414 in G2D, and 2316 in GPU compute. DirectX legacy tests show 100 in DirectX 9, 39 in DirectX 10, 35 in DirectX 11, and 28 in DirectX 12. The RX 550's only additional benchmark is 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 127, which has no direct counterpart in the RX 5500M's data.

Within the nearest rival group, the RX 5500M sits almost exactly at the same performance level as the FirePro M6100 and HD 8950M, with deltas of 0% and -0.1% respectively. The RX 550 similarly trades blows with the RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (both variants) at -0.1% and the GTX 1650 SUPER at 0.3%. Neither GPU dramatically outperforms its immediate competitors, but the RX 5500M operates in a higher performance tier overall.