AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 580 Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear overall winner: the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT. Across the 11 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, it claims 8 wins, while the AMD Radeon RX 580 takes 3. The RX 5500 XT’s average benchmark score is 14,692, placing it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 580’s average is 12,928, in the 53rd percentile. The RX 5500 XT leads the RX 580 by roughly 13.6% in average score, a margin that is consistent across several modern API workloads.

For buyers choosing between these two end-of-life cards, the RX 5500 XT is the stronger pick for DirectX 12, compute-heavy tasks, and Metal/OpenCL workloads. The RX 580 retains relevance for DirectX 11 and Vulkan users, where its margins are smaller but real. The RX 5500 XT’s 7 nm process node and RDNA 1.0 architecture deliver efficiency gains, evidenced by its 130 W TDP versus the RX 580’s 185 W. However, the RX 580 counters with a 256-bit memory bus and 8 GB of GDDR5, which explains its edge in Vulkan and DirectX 11 tests. Strictly from the data, the RX 5500 XT is the more balanced card, though the RX 580’s legacy API performance keeps it competitive in specific scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 5500 XT dominates in compute and modern API benchmarks. Its largest win is in Passmark GPU Compute, where it scores 4,446 versus 3,488, a 27.5% advantage. Geekbench OpenCL shows a 25.4% lead (46,965 vs 37,453), and Geekbench Metal shows a 21.2% lead (54,842 vs 45,235). These results indicate the RX 5500 XT’s RDNA architecture scales better with parallel compute tasks and Apple’s Metal API. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, it wins by 2.7% (1,032 vs 1,005), and in Passmark G3D it wins by 3.1% (9,083 vs 8,813). It also takes Passmark DirectX 9 by 7.3% (133 vs 124) and Passmark G2D by 0.7% (774 vs 769).

The RX 580 wins in three areas. Geekbench Vulkan is its narrowest victory: 45,173 versus 44,191, a 2.2% lead. Passmark DirectX 11 sees it ahead by 6.7% (60 vs 56), and Passmark DirectX 12 shows a 7% lead (43 vs 40). These wins align with the RX 580’s larger 256-bit memory bus and higher raw shading unit count (2,304 vs 1,408). For users running Vulkan titles or DirectX 11 legacy games, the RX 580’s architecture provides measurable benefits, though the margins are modest compared to the RX 5500 XT’s compute dominance.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations and process nodes. The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip on TSMC’s 7 nm process, housing 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. Its RDNA 1.0 architecture marks a departure from AMD’s prior GCN designs, with a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². The RX 580 uses the Polaris 20 chip on GlobalFoundries’ 14 nm process, with 5,700 million transistors on a 232 mm² die and a density of 24.6M per mm². The smaller, denser die of the RX 5500 XT contributes to its lower TDP (130 W vs 185 W) and higher clock speeds: base 1,607 MHz and boost 1,845 MHz versus the RX 580’s base 1,257 MHz and boost 1,340 MHz.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The RX 5500 XT has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s. Despite the RX 580’s higher bandwidth, the RX 5500 XT’s GDDR6 operates at 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus the RX 580’s 2,000 MHz (8 Gbps effective), showing that interface width and memory type trade off. The RX 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the RX 580 uses PCIe 3.0 x16, a difference that affects platform compatibility but not directly reflected in benchmark scores.

Shader resources favor the RX 580 on paper: 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs versus the RX 5500 XT’s 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. However, the RX 5500 XT’s higher clocks close the gap in many tests. Its pixel rate is 59.04 GPixel/s versus 42.88 GPixel/s for the RX 580, and its texture rate is 162.4 GTexel/s versus 193.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput favors the RX 580 at 6.175 TFLOPS versus 5.196 TFLOPS, but FP16 differs: the RX 5500 XT achieves 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the RX 580 is capped at 6.175 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio). API support also differs: the RX 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the RX 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT has an average benchmark score of 14,692, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 580’s 12,928.

Q: Why does the RX 580 win in Vulkan if the RX 5500 XT is generally faster?

A: The RX 580’s Geekbench Vulkan score is 45,173 versus 44,191 for the RX 5500 XT, a 2.2% lead. This likely stems from its higher memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s) and larger 256-bit bus, which benefit Vulkan’s memory access patterns.

Q: Which card is more efficient based on power draw?

A: The RX 5500 XT has a TDP of 130 W and a suggested PSU of 300 W, while the RX 580 has a TDP of 185 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RX 5500 XT is clearly the more power-efficient option.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest delta is in Passmark GPU Compute, where the RX 5500 XT scores 4,446 versus 3,488, a 27.5% advantage. Geekbench OpenCL follows at 25.4% (46,965 vs 37,453).

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 5500 XT supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 580 supports DirectX 12 (12_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but their Vulkan versions differ: 1.4 for the RX 5500 XT and 1.3 for the RX 580.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The RX 580 has 8 GB of GDDR5, while the RX 5500 XT has 4 GB of GDDR6. The RX 580 also has a wider 256-bit bus, while the RX 5500 XT uses a 128-bit bus.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The RX 5500 XT’s win count of 8 out of 11 is decisive, but the size of each win varies. Its strongest performance comes in Passmark GPU Compute, where it scores 4,446 versus 3,488 for a 27.5% lead. This is the single largest delta in the comparison. Geekbench OpenCL is nearly as decisive: 46,965 versus 37,453, a 25.4% gap. Geekbench Metal shows a 21.2% advantage (54,842 vs 45,235), indicating strong performance in Apple ecosystem applications. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 5500 XT wins by a modest 2.7% (1,032 vs 1,005), and in Passmark G3D it wins by 3.1% (9,083 vs 8,813). Passmark DirectX 9 shows a 7.3% lead (133 vs 124). The smallest RX 5500 XT win is Passmark G2D at 0.7% (774 vs 769), essentially a tie. Passmark DirectX 10 is a perfect tie at 46 for both cards.

The RX 580’s three wins are narrower. Its best is Passmark DirectX 12, where it scores 43 versus 40, a 7% lead. Passmark DirectX 11 shows a 6.7% advantage (60 vs 56). Geekbench Vulkan is the closest: 45,173 versus 44,191, a 2.2% margin. These three wins share a pattern: they are all API-specific tests where the RX 580’s higher bandwidth (256.0 GB/s) and wider bus (256-bit) appear to compensate for its lower clocks and older GCN architecture. In contrast, the RX 5500 XT’s wins span compute, Metal, and DX12, suggesting a broader overall capability.

When placed against their nearest rivals, the RX 5500 XT sits 0.4% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 (14,747) and 1.1% above the NVIDIA Quadro M2000 (14,532). The RX 580 sits 0.1% below the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile (12,940) and 0.4% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 SUPER (12,986). These context points show that the RX 5500 XT competes in a higher performance tier than the RX 580, even as both cards are end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The RX 5500 XT uses the Navi 14 chip on a 7 nm TSMC process, while the RX 580 uses Polaris 20 on a 14 nm GlobalFoundries process. Transistor counts are close (6,400 million vs 5,700 million), but die size favors the RX 5500 XT at 158 mm² versus 232 mm². Transistor density is 40.5M per mm² for the RX 5500 XT and 24.6M per mm² for the RX 580.

Clock speeds are substantially higher on the RX 5500 XT: base 1,607 MHz and boost 1,845 MHz, with a game clock of 1,717 MHz. The RX 580 has base 1,257 MHz and boost 1,340 MHz, with no game clock listed. Memory clocks differ by type: the RX 5500 XT runs 1,750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on GDDR6, while the RX 580 runs 2,000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) on GDDR5. Memory size, bus width, and bandwidth all favor the RX 580: 8 GB, 256-bit, and 256.0 GB/s versus 4 GB, 128-bit, and 224.0 GB/s.

Compute resources diverge sharply. The RX 580 has 2,304 shading units, 144 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The RX 5500 XT has 1,408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the RX 5500 XT (59.04 GPixel/s vs 42.88 GPixel/s), while texture rate favors the RX 580 (193.0 GTexel/s vs 162.4 GTexel/s). FP32 is higher on the RX 580 at 6.175 TFLOPS versus 5.196 TFLOPS, but FP16 is higher on the RX 5500 XT at 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1) versus 6.175 TFLOPS (1:1). TDP differs by 55 W: 130 W for the RX 5500 XT and 185 W for the RX 580. The suggested PSU follows suit: 300 W versus 450 W.

Bus interface and physical dimensions also differ. The RX 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8 and measures 180 mm (7.1 inches). The RX 580 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 and measures 241 mm (9.5 inches). Both are dual-slot with a single 8-pin power connector and identical display outputs (1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a). API support differs in DirectX and Vulkan versions, as noted. Release dates place the RX 580 in April 2017 and the RX 5500 XT in December 2019. The RX 5500 XT has a launch MSRP of 169 USD, while the RX 580 has a launch MSRP of 229 USD.