AMD Radeon RX 5500M vs AMD Radeon RX 7700 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 records an average benchmark score of 15852, while the AMD Radeon RX 5500M records 13356. The RX 7700 leads by roughly 18.7% based on those averages.

Q: How do the two cards compare in DirectX 12 performance?

A: In the Passmark DirectX 12 test, the RX 7700 scores 96 versus the RX 5500M's 28. That is a 242.9% advantage for the RX 7700, indicating substantially stronger modern API performance.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5500M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700 has four times the capacity and nearly three times the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher ray tracing capability?

A: Only the RX 7700 lists dedicated ray tracing cores at 40 units. The RX 5500M has no listed ray tracing cores at all.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The RX 7700 uses a 5 nm process from TSMC, while the RX 5500M uses a 7 nm process from the same foundry. The RX 7700 also has a much higher transistor count at 28,100 million versus 6,400 million.

Q: Which GPU holds the higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RX 7700 sits at the 58th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5500M sits at the 54th percentile. Both are mid-pack performers, but the RX 7700 ranks higher overall.

Architecture Differences

The RX 7700 and RX 5500M belong to different generations of AMD's Radeon lineup. The RX 7700 comes from the Radeon RX 7000 series built on RDNA 3.0 architecture, codenamed "Wheat Nas" and classified under Navi III (RX 7000). The RX 5500M comes from the Radeon RX 5000 series built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, classified under Navi Mobile (RX 5000M).

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The RX 7700 is built on a 5 nm process at TSMC, while the RX 5500M uses a 7 nm process at the same foundry. This contributes to a major density difference: the RX 7700 packs 81.2 million transistors per square millimeter across a 346 mm² die for a total of 28,100 million transistors. The RX 5500M has 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter across a 158 mm² die for a total of 6,400 million transistors. The RX 7700's die is more than twice as large and holds more than four times the transistors.

Compute resources are also dramatically different. The RX 7700 has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 96 render output units, and 40 ray tracing cores. The RX 5500M has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units, with no ray tracing cores listed. The RX 7700's pixel rate is 236.1 GPixel/s versus 52.64 GPixel/s for the RX 5500M, and its texture rate is 393.4 GTexel/s versus 144.8 GTexel/s.

Clock speeds tell a similar story. The RX 7700 has a base clock of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2459 MHz. The RX 5500M runs at a base of 1375 MHz, a game clock of 1448 MHz, and a boost of 1645 MHz. Memory clocks also differ: the RX 7700 runs at 2438 MHz with 19.5 Gbps effective, while the RX 5500M runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

API support differs as well. The RX 7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7700 has dual-slot cooling, two 8-pin power connectors, and a 200 W TDP. The RX 5500M has no power connectors listed, an 85 W TDP, and no slot width data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is one-sided. The RX 7700 wins all eight recorded comparisons, and every margin is substantial.

The largest win comes in Passmark DirectX 11, where the RX 7700 scores 186 against the RX 5500M's 35, a 431.4% advantage. That is more than five times the performance in a legacy API. The second-largest win is in Passmark GPU Compute, where the RX 7700 scores 10963 versus 2316, a 373.4% margin. Compute workloads clearly favor the newer architecture heavily.

In Passmark G3D, the RX 7700 scores 20974 versus 5848, a 258.7% advantage. This is the closest match to overall gaming performance and shows the RX 7700 is roughly 3.6 times faster in that aggregate 3D test. Passmark DirectX 12 shows a 242.9% lead, with 96 versus 28. Passmark G2D shows a 191.3% lead, with 1206 versus 414. Passmark DirectX 9 shows a 161% lead, with 261 versus 100. Passmark DirectX 10 shows a 135.9% lead, with 92 versus 39.

The Geekbench OpenCL result is also notable. The RX 7700 scores 106028 versus the RX 5500M's 38725, a 173.8% advantage. This is a compute-oriented benchmark, and the gap reflects the RX 7700's far higher FP32 throughput of 25.18 TFLOPS versus 4.632 TFLOPS for the RX 5500M.

For context on where each card sits relative to its own peers, the RX 7700's average score of 15852 places it just 1.7% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti (16129), 1% behind the AMD Radeon RX 9060 (16014), and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon Pro W5500 (15679). The RX 5500M's average of 13356 puts it within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13321) and 0.4% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 555 (13407). The RX 7700 is not just faster than the RX 5500M; it competes in a different performance class entirely.

The Verdict

The recorded data leaves no ambiguity. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is the superior GPU by every measurable metric. It wins all eight head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 135.9% to 431.4%. No benchmark in the database shows the RX 5500M winning or even approaching the RX 7700.

The RX 7700's 58th percentile ranking versus the RX 5500M's 54th percentile confirms the gap in the broader GPU landscape. Each card sits near the 50th to 60th percentile of all GPUs, but the RX 7700 is on the higher end of that band. Its nearest rivals include the RTX 3060 Ti and RX 9060, while the RX 5500M's nearest rivals are mobile workstation parts like the AMD FirePro M6100 and Radeon Pro 555X.

The RX 7700 is also the only one of the two that is still in active production. The RX 5500M is marked as end-of-life. The RX 7700 released in September 2025, while the RX 5500M released in October 2019, so the RX 7700 is the newer product by a wide margin.

The choice between them is straightforward for anyone comparing the two. The RX 7700 is the only one that supports ray tracing hardware, the only one with DirectX 12 Ultimate, and the only one with a modern 5 nm process. The RX 5500M is a legacy mobile part with a much smaller memory pool and far lower compute throughput. Data indicates that any user choosing the RX 5500M over the RX 7700 would be choosing a significantly slower GPU.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly all core specifications. The RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0, while the RX 5500M uses the Navi 14 chip on RDNA 1.0. Process nodes are 5 nm versus 7 nm, both at TSMC.

Transistor counts: 28,100 million versus 6,400 million. Die sizes: 346 mm² versus 158 mm². Transistor density: 81.2M/mm² versus 40.5M/mm².

Clock speeds: The RX 7700 has a 1900 MHz base, 2041 MHz game clock, and 2459 MHz boost. The RX 5500M has a 1375 MHz base, 1448 MHz game clock, and 1645 MHz boost. Memory clocks: 2438 MHz with 19.5 Gbps effective versus 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

Memory: 16 GB GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 624.1 GB/s bandwidth versus 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute units: The RX 7700 has 2560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 96 ROPs, and 40 RT cores. The RX 5500M has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and no RT cores. Pixel rates: 236.1 GPixel/s versus 52.64 GPixel/s. Texture rates: 393.4 GTexel/s versus 144.8 GTexel/s. FP32: 25.18 TFLOPS versus 4.632 TFLOPS. FP16: 25.18 TFLOPS (1:1) versus 9.265 TFLOPS (2:1).

Power: The RX 7700 has a 200 W TDP, dual-slot width, two 8-pin connectors, and a 550 W suggested PSU. The RX 5500M has an 85 W TDP, no listed power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The RX 7700 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RX 5500M uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Display outputs: The RX 7700 has 1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, and 1x USB Type-C. The RX 5500M is listed as "Portable Device Dependent" meaning its outputs depend on the laptop design.

APIs: The RX 7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Dimensions: The RX 7700 is 267 mm long, 135 mm high, and 50 mm wide. The RX 5500M has no listed dimensions.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins in every category that the database measures. There is no benchmark in the head-to-head set where the RX 5500M takes even a single win.

For users who prioritize ray tracing, the RX 7700 has 40 dedicated RT cores, while the RX 5500M has none. For users who need high compute throughput, the RX 7700 offers 25.18 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 4.632 TFLOPS, and its Passmark GPU Compute score is 373.4% higher. For users who work with large textures or high-resolution assets, the 16 GB frame buffer is four times the 4 GB of the RX 5500M, with more than 2.5 times the memory bandwidth.

The RX 5500M's only potential advantage is its power envelope. At 85 W TDP versus 200 W, it consumes far less power, and it has no power connectors listed, making it suitable for portable devices. However, the RX 5500M is also end-of-life, while the RX 7700 is active production. The RX 5500M's average score of 13356 places it within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon Pro 555X, which is a professional mobile part. The RX 7700's average score places it within 1.1% of the RTX 3060 Ti.

For users on a desktop looking for maximum performance, the RX 7700 is the clear choice. For users constrained to a portable device with low power draw, the RX 5500M is the only one of the two that fits that form factor, but the data shows it is dramatically slower in every test. The RX 5500M has no wins in the head-to-head benchmarks, and its nearest rivals are all older, lower-tier mobile parts. The RX 7700 wins all eight tests, and its nearest rivals are modern desktop-class GPUs. The choice is unambiguous from the recorded data.