AMD Radeon RX 550X vs AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT vs AMD Radeon RX 550X

The database places these two AMD parts at nearly the same overall percentile: the RX 6500 XT sits at the 51st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 550X is at the 49th. Yet the recorded benchmark gap is anything but close. In the two shared tests, the RX 6500 XT leads by roughly 4x, which makes the 2-percentile difference in the aggregate rankings look almost misleading. The conclusion is straightforward: these are not competitors in practice, even though their percentile positions happen to overlap.

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is the clear pick for anyone running modern DirectX 12 or Vulkan workloads. Its average benchmark score of 11,842 places it within 1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (11,960) and 1.3% behind the GTX 960A (11,998), while sitting 1.4% ahead of the GTX 1660 (11,680) and 1.9% ahead of the RX 7800 XT (11,627). That is a remarkable grouping: the RX 6500 XT effectively trades blows with much older flagship cards. The RX 550X, by contrast, averages 10,481, which puts it within 0.8% of the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (10,400) and 1.2% behind the RX 6500M (10,362). In absolute terms, the RX 6500 XT leads by 1,361 points, a 13% advantage in the aggregate.

For buyers, the data says this: if the workload is gaming or GPU compute on a modern API, the RX 6500 XT is the only rational choice. The RX 550X's 49th percentile ranking is not a sign of near-parity, it is a sign that the aggregate includes many older or lighter tests where the gap narrows. The RX 550X could be considered only for legacy DirectX 9/10 titles or extremely low-power builds, but even then, its compute scores are a fraction of the newer card's. The wins tally confirms it: 2 wins for the RX 6500 XT, 0 for the RX 550X.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different generations and different foundries. The RX 6500 XT uses the Navi 24 chip on RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on TSMC's 6 nm process. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². The RX 550X uses the Lexa chip on GCN 4.0 architecture, built on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. It has 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, for 21.4 million per mm². The density difference is stark: the newer card crams 2.4x more transistors into nearly the same area.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RX 6500 XT has 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The RX 550X has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.3, and OpenGL 4.6. The API gap matters: 12_2 enables hardware ray tracing and mesh shaders, while 12_0 lacks those features. The RX 6500 XT also doubles the shading units (1,024 vs 512), TMUs (64 vs 32), and ROPs (32 vs 16). Its pixel rate is 90.08 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s for the RX 550X, and its texture rate is 180.2 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 5.765 TFLOPS versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS, a 4.8x difference.

Memory technology also differs. The RX 6500 XT uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 143.9 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 550X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s. The RX 6500 XT achieves higher bandwidth despite half the bus width, thanks to faster memory clocks (18 Gbps effective vs 6 Gbps effective). The RX 550X has a longer physical footprint at 145 mm (5.7 inches), while the RX 6500 XT's length is not recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only two tests are shared between the two cards in the database, and both are decisive wins for the RX 6500 XT. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6500 XT scores 48,289 against 9,662 for the RX 550X, a delta of 399.8%. That is not a marginal improvement; it is a fivefold increase in raw compute throughput. The OpenCL test stresses general-purpose GPU compute, and the results align with the FP32 specification difference of 4.8x.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6500 XT scores 54,724 against 11,299 for the RX 550X, a delta of 384.3%. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that scales well with shader count and memory bandwidth, both of which favor the newer card. The RX 6500 XT's Vulkan score is actually higher than its OpenCL score (54,724 vs 48,289), suggesting the architecture handles Vulkan's explicit control model particularly well. The RX 550X shows the opposite pattern, with Vulkan (11,299) only modestly ahead of OpenCL (9,662).

The deltas are consistent: roughly 4x in both tests. This is not a case where one card wins one type of workload and loses another. The RX 6500 XT dominates across the board in every recorded measurement. The RX 550X's best showing is relative, not absolute: its Vulkan score is 16.9% higher than its OpenCL score, but that still leaves it far behind.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two cards, based on the recorded data:

• Process node: 6 nm (TSMC) vs 14 nm (GlobalFoundries)
• Transistors: 5,400 million vs 2,200 million
• Die size: 107 mm² vs 103 mm²
• Transistor density: 50.5M / mm² vs 21.4M / mm²
• Base clock: 2310 MHz vs 1100 MHz
• Boost clock: 2815 MHz vs 1183 MHz
• Game clock: 2610 MHz (RX 6500 XT only; RX 550X has none)
• Memory clock: 2248 MHz (18 Gbps effective) vs 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective)
• Memory type: GDDR6 vs GDDR5
• Bus width: 64 bit vs 128 bit
• Bandwidth: 143.9 GB/s vs 96.00 GB/s
• Shading units: 1024 vs 512
• TMUs: 64 vs 32
• ROPs: 32 vs 16
• RT cores: 16 vs none
• Pixel rate: 90.08 GPixel/s vs 18.93 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 180.2 GTexel/s vs 37.86 GTexel/s
• FP32: 5.765 TFLOPS vs 1,211.4 GFLOPS
• FP16: 11.53 TFLOPS (2:1) vs 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1)
• TDP: 107 W vs 50 W
• Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs none
• Suggested PSU: 300 W vs 250 W
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x4 vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• Display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DP 1.4a vs 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DP 1.4a
• DirectX: 12 Ultimate (12_2) vs 12 (12_0)
• Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3
• Release date: 2022-01-18 vs 2018-12-15
• Predecessor: Navi vs Polaris
• Successor: Navi III vs Vega

Both cards are dual-slot, end-of-life, and have 4 GB memory. The RX 6500 XT has a launch MSRP of 199 USD. The RX 550X has no recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in raw compute?

A: The RX 6500 XT delivers 5.765 TFLOPS FP32 versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS for the RX 550X, a 4.8x advantage. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 48,289 versus 9,662, a 399.8% lead.

Q: Does the RX 550X support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 550X has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_0). The RX 6500 XT has 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2).

Q: Which card has better memory bandwidth?

A: The RX 6500 XT, with 143.9 GB/s from GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The RX 550X has 96.00 GB/s from GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The newer card achieves higher bandwidth despite half the bus width.

Q: Are the aggregate scores close?

A: No. The RX 6500 XT averages 11,842 across all benchmarks, while the RX 550X averages 10,481. That is a 13% gap, despite the near-identical percentile rankings (51st vs 49th).

Q: Which card requires more power?

A: The RX 6500 XT has a TDP of 107 W with a 1x 6-pin connector and a suggested PSU of 300 W. The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: What is the API support difference?

A: The RX 6500 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The newer card also supports FP16 at 2:1 rate, while the older card does it at 1:1.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6500 XT wins every recorded benchmark and every relevant specification category. In Geekbench Vulkan, its 54,724 score is 384.3% higher than the RX 550X's 11,299. In OpenCL, its 48,289 is 399.8% higher. The wins tally is 2-0. There is no workload in the database where the RX 550X comes out ahead.

The RX 550X does have one advantage: power consumption. At 50 W TDP with no auxiliary power connector, it can run in systems where the RX 6500 XT's 107 W TDP and 6-pin connector would be problematic. The suggested PSU is 250 W versus 300 W. For a low-profile or legacy build with a weak power supply, the RX 550X is the only one of the two that fits. Its 145 mm length also makes it physically shorter, though the RX 6500 XT's dimensions are not recorded.

For gaming, the choice is unambiguous. The RX 6500 XT's 16 RT cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and 90.08 GPixel/s pixel rate make it suitable for modern titles, even if the 4 GB memory is modest. The RX 550X's 18.93 GPixel/s pixel rate and lack of ray tracing limit it to older or lighter games. For compute, the RX 6500 XT's 5.765 TFLOPS FP32 and 11.53 TFLOPS FP16 are in a different class from the RX 550X's 1,211.4 GFLOPS in both precisions.

The percentile data reinforces this. The RX 6500 XT sits within 1% of the GTX 1080 in average score, a card from a much higher tier. The RX 550X sits within 1% of the Tesla C2075, a compute card from 2011. The RX 6500 XT is not just better, it is two generations ahead in architecture, four years newer in release date, and roughly 4x faster in the tests that matter. The only reason to pick the RX 550X is power constraints, and even then, the performance penalty is severe.