AMD Radeon RX 5500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5500M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution. The RX 5500M is a modern 7 nm mobile part from AMD’s RDNA 1.0 family, while the GTX 480 is a 40 nm desktop flagship from NVIDIA’s Fermi generation. Benchmark data shows a single head-to-head comparison where the RX 5500M dominates, yet the GTX 480’s legacy and unique specifications still offer context for understanding how far GPU technology has progressed.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M scores 13,356, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 scores 13,300. The difference is only 0.4%, placing both cards at nearly identical overall performance levels in the database.

Q: How do the two cards compare in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RX 5500M delivers a score of 38,725, which is 191.2% higher than the GTX 480’s 13,300. This is the only head-to-head benchmark available, and it shows a decisive victory for the AMD card.

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RX 5500M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 480 has 1536 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, offering 177.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the process node and transistor count difference?

A: The RX 5500M is built on TSMC’s 7 nm process with 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. The GTX 480 uses TSMC’s 40 nm node with 3,100 million transistors on a 529 mm² die.

Q: Does the GTX 480 support modern APIs like Vulkan?

A: No. The GTX 480’s API support includes DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but Vulkan is listed as null. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the power consumption of each card?

A: The RX 5500M has a TDP of 85 W, while the GTX 480 has a TDP of 250 W. The GTX 480 also requires a 600 W suggested PSU and dual power connectors (1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin), whereas the RX 5500M uses no power connectors.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting a decade of innovation. The RX 5500M uses AMD’s RDNA 1.0 architecture on the Navi 14 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. This allows for 6,400 million transistors packed into a compact 158 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 40.5M per mm². In contrast, the GTX 480 uses NVIDIA’s Fermi architecture on the GF100 chip, built on a 40 nm process. It houses 3,100 million transistors across a massive 529 mm² die, with a density of just 5.9M per mm². The RX 5500M’s modern node gives it a massive efficiency advantage, which is reflected in its 85 W TDP versus the GTX 480’s 250 W TDP.

The shader and compute configurations also differ fundamentally. The RX 5500M features 1,408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operation units (ROPs). The GTX 480, by contrast, has 480 shading units, 60 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The RX 5500M’s FP32 compute is rated at 4.632 TFLOPS, while the GTX 480 manages 1,345.0 GFLOPS. The RX 5500M also supports FP16 compute at 9.265 TFLOPS (2:1 rate), a feature entirely absent from the GTX 480’s specs. Pixel and texture rates tell the same story: the RX 5500M delivers 52.64 GPixel/s and 144.8 GTexel/s, versus the GTX 480’s 21.03 GPixel/s and 42.06 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another major differentiator. The RX 5500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit interface, achieving 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 480 uses 1536 MB of GDDR5 on a wider 384-bit bus, but its older memory technology caps bandwidth at 177.4 GB/s. The RX 5500M’s PCIe 4.0 x8 interface is two generations ahead of the GTX 480’s PCIe 2.0 x16. The GTX 480 is a dual-slot desktop card with display outputs of 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a, while the RX 5500M is portable-device-dependent, meaning its outputs vary by laptop design.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are lopsided. The AMD Radeon RX 5500M scores 38,725, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 scores 13,300. That translates to a 191.2% advantage for the RX 5500M, which is nearly triple the GTX 480’s output. This massive delta underscores the compute throughput advantage of the modern RDNA architecture, particularly in raw parallel workloads that leverage the RX 5500M’s higher shader count and FP32 capability.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 5500M has a richer test profile, with scores across Geekbench Metal (50,359), Geekbench Vulkan (35,693), and Passmark tests for DirectX 10, 11, 12, and 9, as well as G2D, G3D, and GPU compute. Its Passmark G3D score is 5,848, and its GPU compute score is 2,316. The GTX 480 has only one recorded benchmark in the database: the Geekbench OpenCL score of 13,300. For context, the RX 5500M’s OpenCL score is 191.2% higher than its own average benchmark score of 13,356, while the GTX 480’s single score exactly matches its average of 13,300.

The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the RX 5500M at 13,356 and the GTX 480 at 13,300, a difference of just 0.4%. However, this is misleading because the averages are computed from different test sets. The RX 5500M’s average includes multiple modern API tests, whereas the GTX 480’s average is based solely on one OpenCL run. In terms of percentile ranking among all GPUs, the RX 5500M sits at the 54th percentile, while the GTX 480 is at the 53rd. Both cards are essentially mid-pack performers by this metric, but the RX 5500M’s modern feature set makes it the more capable card for current workloads.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal stark contrasts across nearly every category. The process node differs: 7 nm for the RX 5500M versus 40 nm for the GTX 480. Transistor counts are 6,400 million versus 3,100 million, with die sizes of 158 mm² versus 529 mm². The RX 5500M’s clocks include a base of 1375 MHz, boost of 1645 MHz, and game clock of 1448 MHz, with memory at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective). The GTX 480 has no base, boost, or game clock listed, only a memory clock of 924 MHz (3.7 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 4 GB GDDR6 versus 1536 MB GDDR5, with bus widths of 128-bit and 384-bit respectively.

Compute resources differ: 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 32 ROPs for the RX 5500M, compared to 480 shading units, 60 TMUs, and 48 ROPs for the GTX 480. The RX 5500M achieves 4.632 TFLOPS FP32 and 9.265 TFLOPS FP16, while the GTX 480 manages 1,345.0 GFLOPS FP32 with no FP16 support. Pixel and texture rates are 52.64 GPixel/s and 144.8 GTexel/s for the RX 5500M, versus 21.03 GPixel/s and 42.06 GTexel/s for the GTX 480. Power figures are dramatically different: 85 W TDP for the RX 5500M, 250 W TDP for the GTX 480. The GTX 480 is dual-slot with 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, requires a 600 W PSU, and measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length. The RX 5500M uses no power connectors and has no listed dimensions. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 2.0 x16. API support: DirectX 12 (12_1) for RX 5500M versus DirectX 12 (11_0) for GTX 480, and Vulkan 1.4 versus none. The GTX 480 has a launch MSRP of 499 USD, while the RX 5500M has no launch MSRP listed.

The Verdict

The data strongly favors the AMD Radeon RX 5500M for any modern workload. Its 191.2% advantage in the Geekbench OpenCL head-to-head is the definitive metric, showing that the RX 5500M delivers nearly triple the compute performance of the GTX 480. The RX 5500M also offers 4 GB of GDDR6 memory compared to 1536 MB of GDDR5, a newer PCIe interface, and support for Vulkan 1.4, which the GTX 480 lacks entirely. For gaming or compute tasks using current APIs, the RX 5500M is clearly the superior choice.

However, the GTX 480 is not without its own historical merits. It has a 384-bit memory bus, which is wider than the RX 5500M’s 128-bit bus, and its 48 ROPs outnumber the RX 5500M’s 32, potentially benefiting certain rasterization-heavy workloads from that era. The GTX 480’s average benchmark score of 13,300 is within 0.4% of the RX 5500M’s 13,356, meaning in purely aggregate terms, they are statistical peers. The GTX 480 also holds the distinction of being a desktop card with fixed display outputs and a 499 USD launch MSRP, whereas the RX 5500M is a mobile part with no fixed output configuration.

Who should pick which? Users running legacy applications optimized for Fermi-era hardware, or those needing a wide memory bus and high ROP count, might find the GTX 480 adequate for basic tasks. But for anyone seeking modern API support, lower power consumption (85 W versus 250 W), and dramatically higher compute performance, the RX 5500M is the only rational choice. The percentile rankings—54th for the RX 5500M versus 53rd for the GTX 480—suggest both are mid-tier performers, but the RX 5500M’s efficiency and feature set make it the more future-proof option. The benchmark data is unambiguous: the RX 5500M wins the single head-to-head test by a landslide, and its broader benchmark suite confirms it is the more versatile and capable GPU.