AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 vs NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile Comparison

The benchmark data clearly separates these two professional GPUs, with the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile taking a decisive lead in both recorded tests. The RTX A5500 Mobile achieves an average benchmark score of 113,944, placing it in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 scores 92,466 on average, sitting in the 93rd percentile. While both are end-of-life products, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the superior performer in raw compute tasks, though the MI60 offers specific architectural advantages in memory capacity and half-precision throughput that may matter for specialized workloads.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for most users: the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile outperforms the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 in both benchmark categories tested. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287 against the MI60’s 92,488, a 34.4% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin narrows to 12.1%, with scores of 103,601 and 92,444 respectively. The RTX A5500 Mobile wins both head-to-head matchups, giving it a 2-0 record.

However, the MI60 is not without merit. It packs 32 GB of HBM2 memory versus the RTX A5500 Mobile’s 16 GB of GDDR6, and its memory bandwidth of 1.02 TB/s more than doubles the NVIDIA card’s 512.0 GB/s. For workloads that are memory-capacity-bound or bandwidth-starved, the MI60’s specifications could make it the practical choice despite lower raw compute scores. The RTX A5500 Mobile is the pick for general compute, gaming-adjacent tasks, and any workload leveraging ray tracing or tensor operations, which the MI60 lacks entirely. The MI60 is the pick for large dataset processing or memory-intensive scientific workloads where its 32 GB frame buffer is non-negotiable.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile uses the GA103 chip built on Ampere architecture, manufactured by Samsung on an 8 nm process. It packs 22,000 million transistors into a 496 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 44.4 million per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 uses the Vega 20 chip based on GCN 5.1 architecture, fabricated by TSMC on a more advanced 7 nm process. The MI60’s die is smaller at 331 mm² and houses 13,230 million transistors, resulting in a lower density of 40.0 million per mm².

Compute resources diverge sharply. The RTX A5500 Mobile features 7,424 shading units, 232 TMUs, and 96 ROPs, alongside 58 ray tracing cores and 232 tensor cores. The MI60 counters with 4,096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but has no ray tracing or tensor cores at all. This reflects their intended roles: the RTX A5500 Mobile is a modern workstation GPU with hardware acceleration for ray-traced rendering and AI inference, while the MI60 is a pure compute accelerator focused on raw throughput. Clock speeds favor the AMD part, with a base of 1200 MHz and boost of 1800 MHz versus 975 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost on the NVIDIA card. However, the RTX A5500 Mobile’s higher shading unit count and FP32 performance of 22.27 TFLOPS overcome the clock deficit, beating the MI60’s 14.75 TFLOPS FP32 output.

Memory architectures are completely different. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MI60 uses 32 GB of HBM2 on a massive 4096-bit bus, achieving 1.02 TB/s bandwidth. This is the single biggest architectural advantage for the AMD card. The MI60 also offers FP16 performance of 29.49 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio to FP32, while the RTX A5500 Mobile delivers FP16 at 22.27 TFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, meaning the MI60 is significantly faster in half-precision workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile delivers 22.27 TFLOPS FP32, while the AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 provides 14.75 TFLOPS. The NVIDIA card is roughly 51% faster in standard single-precision compute based on these figures.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: No. The MI60 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The RTX A5500 Mobile includes 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 has 1.02 TB/s bandwidth using 32 GB of HBM2 across a 4096-bit bus. The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile has 512.0 GB/s bandwidth with 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus.

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare in Vulkan?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 103,601 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 12.1% higher than the MI60’s 92,444. The NVIDIA card wins this test, but the margin is much smaller than in OpenCL.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile is rated at 165 W TDP and uses no external power connectors. The MI60 has a 300 W TDP and requires 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The RTX A5500 Mobile ranks in the 94th percentile of all GPUs, while the MI60 ranks in the 93rd percentile. Despite the narrow percentile gap, the actual benchmark score difference is substantial at 23.2%.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The RTX A5500 Mobile uses an 8 nm Samsung process, while the MI60 uses a 7 nm TSMC process. Transistor counts are 22,000 million versus 13,230 million, with die sizes of 496 mm² and 331 mm² respectively. Clock speeds favor the MI60 at 1200 MHz base and 1800 MHz boost, against 975 MHz and 1500 MHz on the RTX A5500 Mobile. Memory configuration is a stark contrast: 16 GB GDDR6 on 256-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 32 GB HBM2 on 4096-bit bus with 1.02 TB/s bandwidth.

Compute unit counts show the NVIDIA card leading in shading units (7,424 vs 4,096), ROPs (96 vs 64), and adding 58 RT cores and 232 tensor cores where the MI60 has none. The MI60 leads in TMUs with 256 versus 232. Pixel rates are 144.0 GPixel/s for the RTX A5500 Mobile versus 115.2 GPixel/s for the MI60, while texture rates favor the MI60 at 460.8 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s. FP32 performance favors NVIDIA at 22.27 TFLOPS versus 14.75 TFLOPS, but FP16 favors AMD at 29.49 TFLOPS versus 22.27 TFLOPS. TDP differs significantly at 165 W versus 300 W. The MI60 is a dual-slot card with dimensions of 267 mm length and 111 mm height, while the RTX A5500 Mobile’s dimensions are listed as portable device dependent. API support also diverges: the RTX A5500 Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the MI60 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the largest gap between the two cards. The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 124,287 against the MI60’s 92,488, resulting in a 34.4% delta. This substantial margin likely stems from the NVIDIA card’s higher FP32 throughput, more shading units, and the presence of tensor cores that can accelerate certain compute workloads. The MI60’s 2:1 FP16 ratio does not help in this test, which appears to favor standard single-precision execution.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap considerably. The RTX A5500 Mobile scores 103,601, while the MI60 scores 92,444, a delta of just 12.1%. Vulkan workloads often stress memory bandwidth and driver efficiency, areas where the MI60’s 1.02 TB/s bandwidth may partially compensate for its lower compute throughput. Still, the NVIDIA card wins here, suggesting its architecture handles modern graphics APIs more effectively. The RTX A5500 Mobile’s advantage in this test is roughly one-third of its OpenCL lead, indicating that the MI60 is comparatively more competitive in graphics-oriented tasks than in raw compute.

Looking at nearest rivals provides context. The RTX A5500 Mobile’s average score of 113,944 puts it 2.9% above the AMD Radeon PRO W7900 and just 0.4% below the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB. The MI60’s average of 92,466 is 0.9% above the NVIDIA RTX A4500 and 1.5% above the RTX A4500 Mobile, but 4.8% below the AMD Radeon Pro VII. This places the MI60 in a lower performance tier overall, despite its 93rd percentile ranking being close to the RTX A5500 Mobile’s 94th.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile wins in raw compute performance, as evidenced by its 34.4% OpenCL lead and 12.1% Vulkan lead. It is the stronger choice for FP32-heavy workloads, DirectX 12 Ultimate applications, and any task that can utilize its 58 ray tracing cores or 232 tensor cores. The card’s 16 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for most professional workloads, and its 165 W TDP with no external power connectors makes it far more flexible for mobile or constrained deployments. Its support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate positions it for modern software stacks.

The AMD Radeon Instinct MI60 wins in memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 32 GB HBM2 frame buffer is double the NVIDIA card’s, and its 1.02 TB/s bandwidth is precisely double the RTX A5500 Mobile’s 512.0 GB/s. This makes the MI60 the logical choice for workloads exceeding 16 GB of data, such as large language model inference, massive scientific simulations, or big data analytics. Its FP16 performance of 29.49 TFLOPS is 32% higher than the RTX A5500 Mobile’s 22.27 TFLOPS, making it superior for mixed-precision training or inference where half-precision is acceptable. The MI60 also offers higher texture throughput at 460.8 GTexel/s versus 348.0 GTexel/s, which could benefit certain texture-bound operations.

For users who need a single card to handle everything from conventional compute to ray-traced rendering, the RTX A5500 Mobile is the data-backed choice. For workloads that are strictly memory-bound or that can exploit FP16 throughput, the MI60’s specifications make it the more suitable accelerator, despite losing both benchmark tests. The decision ultimately hinges on whether raw compute scores or memory capacity and bandwidth take priority in the target application.