RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon RX 5500 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 5500 XT with RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RX 5500 XT
2019, $169
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
21.61
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
35.40
+63.8%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms 5500 XT by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking305165
Place by popularity80not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation29.65no data
Power efficiency12.9355.08
ArchitectureRDNA 1 (2019−2020)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 14AD107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date12 December 2019 (6 years ago)21 March 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169 no data

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 cores14083072
Core clock speed1607 MHz1635 MHz
Boost clock speed1845 MHz2115 MHz
Number of transistors6.4 billion18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate162.4203.0
Floating-point processing powerno data12.99 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs8896
Tensor Coresno data96
Ray Tracing Coresno data24
L1 Cacheno data3 MB
L2 Cache2 MB12 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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Length180 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed14000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s256.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4aPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.41.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

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.

RX 5500 XT 21.61
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 35.40
+63.8%

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.

RX 5500 XT 9042
Samples: 4214
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 14808
+63.8%
Samples: 2250

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX 5500 XT 19499
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 28910
+48.3%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RX 5500 XT 68429
+80.8%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 37844

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX 5500 XT 14305
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 21379
+49.5%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX 5500 XT 86609
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 115230
+33%

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 HD76
−36.7%
120−130
1440p4265−70
+54.8%
4K2435−40
+45.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.22no data
1440p4.02no data
4K7.04no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 254 400−450
+57.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 78 120−130
+53.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 72 110−120
+52.8%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 77 120−130
+55.8%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 74 120−130
+62.2%
Counter-Strike 2 196 300−310
+53.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 61 95−100
+55.7%
Far Cry 5 105 170−180
+61.9%
Fortnite 110−120 180−190
+60.7%
Forza Horizon 4 78 120−130
+53.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 56 90−95
+60.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 140−150
+62.8%
Valorant 150−160 250−260
+60.3%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 71 110−120
+54.9%
Counter-Strike 2 98 160−170
+63.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 240−250 400−450
+61.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 45 70−75
+55.6%
Dota 2 149 240−250
+61.1%
Far Cry 5 96 150−160
+56.3%
Fortnite 110−120 180−190
+60.7%
Forza Horizon 4 66 100−105
+51.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 94 150−160
+59.6%
Hogwarts Legacy 42 65−70
+54.8%
Metro Exodus 52 85−90
+63.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 140−150
+62.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95 150−160
+57.9%
Valorant 150−160 250−260
+60.3%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 68 110−120
+61.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 40 65−70
+62.5%
Dota 2 143 230−240
+60.8%
Far Cry 5 89 140−150
+57.3%
Forza Horizon 4 56 90−95
+60.7%
Hogwarts Legacy 31 50−55
+61.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90 140−150
+62.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58 95−100
+63.8%
Valorant 114 180−190
+57.9%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 110−120 180−190
+60.7%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 55 90−95
+63.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160 250−260
+58.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 44 70−75
+59.1%
Metro Exodus 31 50−55
+61.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 280−290
+61.8%
Valorant 180−190 290−300
+59.3%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55 90−95
+63.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 20 30−33
+50%
Far Cry 5 60 95−100
+58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 41 65−70
+58.5%
Hogwarts Legacy 23 35−40
+52.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35 55−60
+61.8%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 50−55 85−90
+63.5%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 13 21−24
+61.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 42 65−70
+54.8%
Hogwarts Legacy 14−16 21−24
+50%
Metro Exodus 19 30−33
+57.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31 50−55
+61.3%
Valorant 120−130 190−200
+58.3%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35 55−60
+57.1%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 30−33
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 8 12−14
+50%
Dota 2 78 120−130
+53.8%
Far Cry 5 30 45−50
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 21 30−33
+42.9%
Hogwarts Legacy 12 18−20
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24 35−40
+52.2%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 24−27 35−40
+45.8%

This is how RX 5500 XT and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 58% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 55% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 46% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.61 35.40
Recency 12 December 2019 21 March 2023
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 50 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile has a 64% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 29% more advanced lithography process, and 62% lower power consumption.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 5500 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 5500 XT is a desktop graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation 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 3549 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.9 228 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 5500 XT or RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.