Radeon Pro 5500M vs GeForce GTX 760

Place in the ranking	402	312
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.47	no data
Power efficiency	5.07	14.31
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	GK104	Navi 14
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	25 June 2013 (11 years ago)	13 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$249	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1152	1536
Core clock speed	980 MHz	1000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1033 MHz	1450 MHz
Number of transistors	3,540 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	85 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	97 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	99.07	139.2
Floating-point processing power	2.378 TFLOPS	4.454 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	96	96

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	241 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Minimum recommended system power	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1502 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	192.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu Ray 3D	+	-
3D Gaming	+	-
3D Vision	+	-
PhysX	+	-
3D Vision Live	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2.131
CUDA	+	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 760 12.48

Pro 5500M 17.63
+41.3%

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.

GTX 760 4797

Pro 5500M 6780
+41.3%

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.

GTX 760 7962

Pro 5500M 14725
+84.9%

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.

GTX 760 5959

Pro 5500M 10399
+74.5%

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.

GTX 760 40150

Pro 5500M 65776
+63.8%

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 HD	68 +17.2%	58 −17.2%
1440p	40−45 −47.5%	59 +47.5%
4K	21−24 −57.1%	33 +57.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.66	no data
1440p	6.23	no data
4K	11.86	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −40.9%	30−35 +40.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −45.8%	35−40 +45.8%
Elden Ring	35−40 −48.6%	55−60 +48.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −39%	55−60 +39%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −40.9%	30−35 +40.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +60%	15 −60%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −46%	70−75 +46%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −97.1%	67 +97.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 −134%	75 +134%
Valorant	45−50 −73.5%	85 +73.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −39%	55−60 +39%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −40.9%	30−35 +40.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +100%	12 −100%
Dota 2	45−50 −84.4%	83 +84.4%
Elden Ring	35−40 −48.6%	55−60 +48.6%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −27.1%	60−65 +27.1%
Fortnite	70−75 −35.2%	95−100 +35.2%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −46%	70−75 +46%
Grand Theft Auto V	45−50 −53.3%	69 +53.3%
Metro Exodus	30−35 −35.3%	46 +35.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 +20.8%	77 −20.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35 +14.3%	28 −14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −44.7%	55−60 +44.7%
Valorant	45−50 −44.9%	70−75 +44.9%
World of Tanks	170−180 −22.4%	208 +22.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 −39%	55−60 +39%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −40.9%	30−35 +40.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −45.8%	35−40 +45.8%
Dota 2	45−50 −138%	107 +138%
Far Cry 5	45−50 −58.3%	76 +58.3%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −46%	70−75 +46%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	90−95 −31.2%	120−130 +31.2%
Valorant	45−50 +75%	28 −75%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −106%	35 +106%
Elden Ring	18−20 −55.6%	27−30 +55.6%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −106%	35 +106%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 −33.8%	107 +33.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
World of Tanks	85−90 −32.6%	118 +32.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 −44%	35−40 +44%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −25%	14−16 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −44.4%	12−14 +44.4%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −69%	49 +69%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 −51.7%	40−45 +51.7%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −57.7%	41 +57.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −53.3%	21−24 +53.3%
Valorant	30−35 +40.9%	22 −40.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
Dota 2	21−24 −8.7%	25 +8.7%
Elden Ring	8−9 −50%	12−14 +50%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 −8.7%	25 +8.7%
Metro Exodus	8−9 −62.5%	12−14 +62.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −59.5%	59 +59.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −8.7%	25 +8.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−12 −54.5%	16−18 +54.5%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Dota 2	21−24 −135%	54 +135%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −66.7%	25 +66.7%
Fortnite	14−16 −50%	21−24 +50%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −52.9%	24−27 +52.9%
Valorant	12−14 −15.4%	15 +15.4%

4K
High Preset

World of Tanks

+0%

This is how GTX 760 and Pro 5500M compete in popular games:

GTX 760 is 17% faster in 1080p
Pro 5500M is 48% faster in 1440p
Pro 5500M is 57% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 760 is 100% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5500M is 138% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 760 is ahead in 6 tests (9%)
Pro 5500M is ahead in 57 tests (89%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	12.48	17.63
Recency	25 June 2013	13 November 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	170 Watt	85 Watt

Pro 5500M has a 41.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5500M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 760 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 5500M is a mobile workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.