AMD Radeon RX 5500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 5500M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A represent two distinct generations of mobile graphics, separated by over four years of architectural evolution. The database shows a decisive performance gap, but the comparison is about more than just speed: it is about feature sets, memory configurations, and the contexts in which each GPU was designed to operate. The RX 5500M, built on a 7 nm process, delivers a benchmark average score of 13356, placing it at the 54th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 960A, on a 28 nm process, averages 11998, sitting at the 51st percentile. While both are end-of-life products, the data reveals which workloads favor each design.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 5500M than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A in the only shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 5500M scores 38725 against the GTX 960A's 11998, a difference of 222.8%. This is the sole head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M has 6,400 million transistors on a 158 mm² die. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The RX 5500M also has a much higher transistor density at 40.5M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm².

Q: What are the memory specifications for each card?

A: The RX 5500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, achieving 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 960A uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, achieving 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Do both cards support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but at different feature levels. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 960A supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 5500M has a pixel rate of 52.64 GPixel/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A has a pixel rate of 18.82 GPixel/s.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The RX 5500M's average score of 13356 is nearly identical to the AMD FirePro M6100 (13354, 0% delta). The GTX 960A's score of 11998 is slightly above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (11960, 0.3% delta) and below the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT (11842, 1.3% delta).

Architecture Differences

The fundamental separation between these two GPUs lies in their manufacturing process and core design. The AMD Radeon RX 5500M is built on TSMC's 7 nm node, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A uses a 28 nm process. This process gap explains the massive difference in transistor density: the RX 5500M packs 40.5 million transistors per square millimeter, compared to 12.6 million for the GTX 960A. The RX 5500M's Navi 14 chip implements the RDNA 1.0 architecture, a design that emphasizes high frequency and efficiency. The GTX 960A's GM107 chip uses the older Maxwell architecture, which was designed for a different era of mobile computing.

The compute resources differ drastically. The RX 5500M has 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster output units (ROPs). The GTX 960A has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the RX 5500M has over twice the shader count and ROP count, and more than double the TMUs. The impact on texture and pixel throughput is substantial. The RX 5500M delivers a texture rate of 144.8 GTexel/s and a pixel rate of 52.64 GPixel/s, while the GTX 960A manages 47.04 GTexel/s and 18.82 GPixel/s respectively.

Clock speeds also differ. The RX 5500M has a base clock of 1375 MHz and a boost clock of 1645 MHz, with a game clock of 1448 MHz. The GTX 960A runs at a base clock of 1097 MHz and a boost clock of 1176 MHz. Memory technology is another divider: the RX 5500M uses GDDR6 running at 14 Gbps effective, while the GTX 960A uses GDDR5 at 5 Gbps effective. Both use a 128-bit bus, but the memory bandwidth reflects the generational leap: 224.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s.

The power envelopes are relatively close. The RX 5500M has a TDP of 85 W, while the GTX 960A has a TDP of 75 W. Neither requires external power connectors. The bus interface differs as well: the RX 5500M uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 960A uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface, reflecting its form factor as an MXM module. The RX 5500M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), whereas the GTX 960A is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0), a notable difference for advanced rendering features.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data strongly favors the AMD Radeon RX 5500M across the board, but the specific areas of dominance reveal where each GPU would have been a better fit. The RX 5500M wins the only direct head-to-head test, the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, by a massive 222.8% margin. This indicates a clear advantage in general-purpose compute workloads, such as OpenCL-accelerated applications, which would be useful for tasks like video encoding or scientific simulations.

In terms of raw fill rate, the RX 5500M's higher pixel and texture rates suggest it would excel in traditional gaming scenarios that depend on high resolution rendering and texture filtering. The GTX 960A, with its lower fill rates and smaller frame buffer, would struggle with modern titles at high settings. However, the GTX 960A's lower TDP of 75 W versus 85 W could make it a better fit for ultra-thin laptops where thermal headroom is minimal, though the database does not provide thermal performance metrics.

The GTX 960A's advantages are not evident in the recorded benchmarks. Its average score of 11998 is lower than the RX 5500M's average of 13356. The GTX 960A does have a higher percentile rank compared to some of its nearest rivals, but those rivals are not the RX 5500M. In fact, the GTX 960A's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080, a desktop flagship, which it slightly outperforms by 0.3% in average score, but this is a quirk of the database's scoring methodology rather than a real-world win. For the RX 5500M, its nearest rivals are all AMD parts, indicating its performance class is different from the GTX 960A's.

The RX 5500M also wins on memory capacity, offering 4 GB versus 2 GB. This is crucial for modern games that exceed 2 GB of video memory at higher resolutions or with high-quality textures. The bandwidth advantage of 224.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s further cements its position for memory-intensive workloads.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key technical specifications where the two GPUs differ, based solely on the database entries.

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 5500M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 6,400 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 158 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 40.5M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1375 MHz | 1097 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1645 MHz | 1176 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Clock | 14 Gbps effective | 5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 80.19 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1408 | 640 |

| TMUs | 88 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 52.64 GPixel/s | 18.82 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 144.8 GTexel/s | 47.04 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.632 TFLOPS | 1.505 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 9.265 TFLOPS (2:1) | Not specified |

| TDP | 85 W | 75 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records only one direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs, which is the Geekbench OpenCL test. In this test, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M scores 38725, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A scores 11998. The delta percentage is 222.8%, meaning the RX 5500M is more than three times faster in this workload. This is a decisive win for the RX 5500M and highlights the generational gap in compute performance.

Looking at the broader benchmark data, the RX 5500M has additional scores that the GTX 960A lacks. The RX 5500M also has a Geekbench Metal score of 50359 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 35693, though the GTX 960A does not have corresponding scores in the database for those tests. The RX 5500M also has PassMark scores across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12, along with G2D and G3D scores. The GTX 960A only has the single OpenCL score. This limited data means the comparison is heavily weighted toward the RX 5500M, but it is the only objective measurement available.

The RX 5500M's average benchmark score of 13356 is 11.3% higher than the GTX 960A's average of 11998, despite the single head-to-head test showing a much larger gap. This discrepancy suggests that the RX 5500M has a more balanced performance profile across different types of workloads, while the GTX 960A's single score may not be representative of its overall capabilities. The RX 5500M's percentile rank of 54 versus 51 for the GTX 960A confirms that it sits slightly higher in the overall performance distribution.

The Verdict

The data makes one thing clear: the AMD Radeon RX 5500M is the superior GPU in every measurable way. It dominates the only shared benchmark, offers double the memory capacity, delivers over twice the shading units and ROPs, and has a significantly higher memory bandwidth. The 7 nm process versus 28 nm process gives it a massive efficiency and density advantage, allowing for higher clock speeds and more compute units within a similar power envelope. Its TDP of 85 W is only 10 W higher than the GTX 960A's 75 W, but it offers roughly three times the FP32 performance (4.632 TFLOPS versus 1.505 TFLOPS).

For a user looking at these two options today, the recommendation is straightforward: choose the RX 5500M if you need any level of modern gaming or compute performance. Its 4 GB of GDDR6 memory is the minimum for current games, and its DirectX 12 (12_1) support is more future-proof than the GTX 960A's 12 (11_0) level. The GTX 960A is only relevant for legacy systems where its lower power draw might be a requirement, or for specific use cases that rely on its MXM form factor. Even then, its 2 GB of GDDR5 memory is a severe limitation. The benchmark results indicate a generational leap, and the RX 5500M is the only sensible pick for any workload that stresses the GPU.