AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT vs NVIDIA P106-090 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT and NVIDIA P106-090 are both end-of-life graphics cards, but they occupy vastly different positions in the hardware landscape. The RX 5500 XT is a retail consumer GPU from the Radeon RX 5000 series, built for gaming with full display outputs, while the P106-090 is a mining-specific card with no display outputs and a PCIe 1.0 x1 interface. Benchmark data shows the AMD card holds a commanding lead across all shared tests, though the NVIDIA card’s lower power draw and unique architecture traits warrant closer examination.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT wins all three shared benchmark tests, with deltas ranging from roughly double to nearly two-and-a-half times the NVIDIA P106-090’s scores. In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RX 5500 XT scores 1032 against the P106-090’s 509, a delta of 102.8%. This means the AMD card is more than twice as fast in this modern DirectX 12 workload, a decisive margin that reflects the generational gap between RDNA 1.0 and Pascal.

The Geekbench OpenCL result shows an even larger gap. The RX 5500 XT posts 46965 points versus 21304 for the P106-090, a 120.5% delta. This compute-oriented test highlights the AMD card’s superior shader throughput and memory bandwidth. The RX 5500 XT’s FP32 performance is rated at 5.196 TFLOPS, while the P106-090 manages only 2.352 TFLOPS — the OpenCL score gap aligns closely with that raw compute difference, though the AMD card’s advantage is amplified by its 224.0 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 192.2 GB/s on the NVIDIA card.

The most lopsided result appears in Geekbench Vulkan, where the RX 5500 XT scores 44191 against 18596, a delta of 137.6%. This near-two-and-a-half-fold margin suggests the AMD architecture handles Vulkan’s low-level API overhead more efficiently, likely due to its newer RDNA 1.0 design and higher clock speeds. The RX 5500 XT boosts to 1845 MHz, while the P106-090 peaks at 1531 MHz, and the AMD card’s 1408 shading units dwarf the NVIDIA card’s 768. When combined with the memory bandwidth advantage, the Vulkan result makes sense as a cumulative effect of these spec differences.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 5500 XT’s average benchmark score is 14692, placing it in the 57th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770 with an average score of 14747, a delta of -0.4%, meaning the RX 5500 XT is essentially tied with that older flagship. The P106-090, by contrast, has an average score of 13470, sitting in the 54th percentile. Its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro 555 at 13407, a delta of 0.5%, showing the P106-090 is marginally ahead of that mobile workstation card. The gap between the two cards’ average scores is 1222 points, which translates to roughly 9.1% — a meaningful but not overwhelming difference in overall performance.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT is the superior performer for any workload that requires graphics output or compute acceleration. It wins all three head-to-head benchmarks with deltas ranging from 102.8% to 137.6%, and its average benchmark score of 14692 is 9.1% higher than the P106-090’s 13470. The RX 5500 XT also offers 4 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 3 GB of GDDR5, a faster 14 Gbps effective memory speed against 8 Gbps, and a wider feature set with display outputs supporting HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a connections.

However, the P106-090 is not without its own niche. Its 75 W TDP is substantially lower than the RX 5500 XT’s 130 W, making it a more power-efficient option for compute-only tasks where display output is irrelevant. The card’s 48 ROPs exceed the RX 5500 XT’s 32, giving it a higher pixel rate of 73.49 GPixel/s versus 59.04 GPixel/s. For workloads that are heavily pixel-bound and do not require the card to render to a screen, the P106-090 could theoretically hold an advantage in specific rasterization throughput.

That said, the P106-090’s fundamental limitations are severe. It has no display outputs, uses a PCIe 1.0 x1 interface that throttles data transfer, and its 3 GB VRAM is increasingly insufficient for modern workloads. Its FP16 performance is a mere 36.74 GFLOPS (1:64), a tiny fraction of the RX 5500 XT’s 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1), making it unsuitable for machine learning or compute tasks that leverage half-precision arithmetic. The RX 5500 XT, with its 7 nm process, 6,400 million transistors, and 158 mm² die size, represents a far more modern and capable design than the P106-090’s 16 nm process, 4,400 million transistors, and 200 mm² die.

For most users, the RX 5500 XT is the obvious choice. It delivers more than double the performance in every shared benchmark, supports modern APIs including DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and can actually output video. The P106-090 is only suitable for a narrow set of compute-only applications where its lower power draw and higher pixel rate might matter, but even then, its PCIe 1.0 x1 interface and lack of modern compute features make it a poor investment. The verdict is straightforward: the RX 5500 XT wins on performance, features, and architecture; the P106-090 wins only on power efficiency and raw pixel throughput.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT than the NVIDIA P106-090 in 3DMark Steel Nomad?

A: The RX 5500 XT scores 1032, while the P106-090 scores 509, giving the AMD card a 102.8% advantage — meaning it is more than twice as fast in this DirectX 12 test.

Q: Does the NVIDIA P106-090 support display output?

A: No. The P106-090 has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for gaming or any task that requires connecting a monitor. The RX 5500 XT, by contrast, offers 1x HDMI 2.0b and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.

Q: Which card has more memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 5500 XT offers 224.0 GB/s bandwidth from its 4 GB GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, compared to the P106-090’s 192.2 GB/s from 3 GB GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two cards?

A: The RX 5500 XT has an average benchmark score of 14692, while the P106-090 sits at 13470. This represents a 9.1% gap in favor of the AMD card.

Q: Which card has a higher pixel rate?

A: The P106-090 has a higher pixel rate at 73.49 GPixel/s, thanks to its 48 ROPs, versus the RX 5500 XT’s 59.04 GPixel/s from 32 ROPs.

Q: Are both cards using the same manufacturing process?

A: No. The RX 5500 XT uses a 7 nm TSMC process, while the P106-090 uses a 16 nm TSMC process. The AMD card also has a smaller die size (158 mm²) despite packing more transistors (6,400 million vs 4,400 million).

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 5500 XT uses a 7 nm process with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die, while the P106-090 uses a 16 nm process with 4,400 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. This gives the AMD card a transistor density of 40.5M per mm² versus 22.0M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds favor AMD: the RX 5500 XT has a base clock of 1607 MHz, a boost of 1845 MHz, and a game clock of 1717 MHz. The P106-090 runs at 1354 MHz base and 1531 MHz boost, with no game clock listed. Memory configurations are starkly different — the RX 5500 XT features 4 GB GDDR6 at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) on a 128-bit bus, while the P106-090 has 3 GB GDDR5 at 2002 MHz (8 Gbps effective) on a 192-bit bus. The AMD card achieves 224.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 192.2 GB/s.

Compute resources show a significant gap: the RX 5500 XT has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the P106-090 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The AMD card’s texture rate is 162.4 GTexel/s versus 73.49 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, and its FP32 performance is 5.196 TFLOPS versus 2.352 TFLOPS. The FP16 difference is enormous: 10.39 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD versus 36.74 GFLOPS (1:64) for NVIDIA.

Power and physical characteristics also diverge. The RX 5500 XT has a 130 W TDP, requires a 1x 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The P106-090 draws 75 W, uses a 1x 6-pin connector, and suggests a 250 W PSU. The AMD card is shorter at 180 mm (7.1 inches) versus 250 mm (9.8 inches) for NVIDIA. The bus interface differs critically: the RX 5500 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the P106-090 uses PCIe 1.0 x1. The RX 5500 XT has display outputs, while the P106-090 has none. Finally, the RX 5500 XT has a launch MSRP of 169 USD, while the P106-090 has no recorded launch MSRP.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two cards is profound. The RX 5500 XT is built on RDNA 1.0, AMD’s modern gaming architecture that succeeded the aging Vega line and predates Navi II. It uses the Navi 14 chip and belongs to the Navi (RX 5000) generation. The P106-090, in contrast, uses the Pascal architecture with the GP106 chip and belongs to NVIDIA’s “Mining GPUs” generation, a specialized product line stripped of display capabilities for cryptocurrency mining.

The manufacturing processes reflect their respective eras: the RX 5500 XT uses TSMC’s 7 nm node, while the P106-090 uses TSMC’s 16 nm node. This process advantage allows AMD to pack 6,400 million transistors into a smaller 158 mm² die, achieving a density of 40.5M per mm². The P106-090’s 16 nm process limits it to 4,400 million transistors across a larger 200 mm² die, with a density of just 22.0M per mm².

Compute capabilities show the RDNA design’s superiority. The RX 5500 XT doubles the shading units (1408 vs 768) and nearly doubles the TMUs (88 vs 48), while the P106-090 has more ROPs (48 vs 32). The FP32 throughput of 5.196 TFLOPS versus 2.352 TFLOPS reflects the raw compute lead. More striking is FP16 performance: RDNA 1.0 delivers 10.39 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while Pascal’s 1:64 ratio yields a paltry 36.74 GFLOPS. This makes the RX 5500 XT vastly better suited for workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The RX 5500 XT uses GDDR6 with a 128-bit bus and 1750 MHz clock (14 Gbps effective), while the P106-090 uses GDDR5 with a 192-bit bus and 2002 MHz clock (8 Gbps effective). Despite the narrower bus, AMD’s newer memory technology delivers higher bandwidth (224.0 GB/s vs 192.2 GB/s) and more capacity (4 GB vs 3 GB). The feature set also diverges: the RX 5500 XT supports PCIe 4.0 x8, HDMI 2.0b, and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the P106-090 is limited to PCIe 1.0 x1 and has no display outputs at all. Both cards support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, but the RX 5500 XT’s newer architecture and superior memory system make it the more capable and future-proof design for any application that does not specifically require the P106-090’s lower 75 W power draw.