Radeon RX 5500 XT vs Pro Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with Radeon RX 5500 XT, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
30.79
+42.4%

Pro 64 outperforms 5500 XT by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking208302
Place by popularitynot in top-10080
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.10
Power efficiency9.5912.95
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)RDNA 1 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameVega 10Navi 14
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date27 June 2017 (9 years ago)12 December 2019 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$169

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores40961408
Core clock speed1250 MHz1607 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1845 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million6.4 billion
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6162.4
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPSno data
ROPs6432
TMUs25688
L1 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB2 MB

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mm180 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.1.1251.4

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Pro Vega 64 30.79
+42.4%
RX 5500 XT 21.62

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Pro Vega 64 12882
+42.4%
Samples: 29
RX 5500 XT 9046
Samples: 4177

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 71094
+58.3%
RX 5500 XT 44925

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 74174
+76.3%
RX 5500 XT 42083

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD100−11076
−24%
1440p55−60
+31%
42
4K30−35
+25%
24

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.22
1440pno data4.02
4Kno data7.04

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 98 98
Counter-Strike 2 254 254
Cyberpunk 2077 78 78

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 75 75
Battlefield 5 74 74
Counter-Strike 2 196 196
Cyberpunk 2077 61 61
Far Cry 5 105 105
Fortnite 110−120 110−120
Forza Horizon 4 78 78
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 85−90
Valorant 150−160 150−160

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 43 43
Battlefield 5 71 71
Counter-Strike 2 98 98
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 240−250
Cyberpunk 2077 45 45
Dota 2 149 149
Far Cry 5 96 96
Far Cry 6 78 78
Fortnite 110−120 110−120
Forza Horizon 4 66 66
Grand Theft Auto V 94 94
Metro Exodus 52 52
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 85−90
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95 95
Valorant 150−160 150−160

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 68 68
Cyberpunk 2077 40 40
Dota 2 143 143
Far Cry 5 89 89
Forza Horizon 4 56 56
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 85−90
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58 58
Valorant 114 114

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120 110−120

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 55 55
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160 150−160
Far Cry 6 43 43
Grand Theft Auto V 44 44
Metro Exodus 31 31
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 180−190 180−190

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55 55
Cyberpunk 2077 20 20
Far Cry 5 60 60
Forza Horizon 4 41 41
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 35−40

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55 50−55

4K
High

Atomic Heart 16−18 16−18
Counter-Strike 2 13 13
Far Cry 6 12 12
Grand Theft Auto V 42 42
Metro Exodus 19 19
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31 31
Valorant 120−130 120−130

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35 35
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 21−24
Cyberpunk 2077 8 8
Dota 2 78 78
Far Cry 5 30 30
Forza Horizon 4 21 21
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24 21−24

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27 24−27

This is how Pro Vega 64 and RX 5500 XT compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64 is 32% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 31% faster in 1440p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 25% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 30.79 21.62
Recency 27 June 2017 12 December 2019
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 130 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 42% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RX 5500 XT, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 50% more advanced lithography process, and 48% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 5500 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 5500 XT is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 23 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3545 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro Vega 64 or Radeon RX 5500 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.