Radeon Pro 5500 XT vs GeForce GTX 760M

Place in the ranking	664	259
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.65	11.82
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	GK106	Navi 14
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	30 May 2013 (11 years ago)	4 August 2020 (4 years ago)

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	768	1536
Core clock speed	657 MHz	1187 MHz
Boost clock speed	657 MHz	1757 MHz
Number of transistors	2,540 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	125 Watt
Texture fill rate	42.05	168.7
Floating-point processing power	1.009 TFLOPS	5.398 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	64	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	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	no data	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.0 GB/s	224.0 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	No outputs	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.2
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 760M 4.50

Pro 5500 XT 21.41
+376%

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 760M 1729

Pro 5500 XT 8231
+376%

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:

900p	41 −363%	190−200 +363%
Full HD	44 −355%	200−210 +355%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −358%	55−60 +358%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Elden Ring	10−12 −355%	50−55 +355%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −358%	55−60 +358%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −364%	65−70 +364%
Valorant	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −358%	55−60 +358%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Dota 2	14−16 −364%	65−70 +364%
Elden Ring	10−12 −355%	50−55 +355%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −355%	100−105 +355%
Fortnite	24−27 −362%	120−130 +362%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −364%	65−70 +364%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −362%	180−190 +362%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −364%	65−70 +364%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −367%	70−75 +367%
Valorant	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
World of Tanks	98 −359%	450−500 +359%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −358%	55−60 +358%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Dota 2	14−16 −364%	65−70 +364%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −355%	100−105 +355%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −374%	90−95 +374%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −362%	180−190 +362%
Valorant	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Elden Ring	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−33 −367%	140−150 +367%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
World of Tanks	30−35 −369%	150−160 +369%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −344%	40−45 +344%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −350%	45−50 +350%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −350%	27−30 +350%
Valorant	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Elden Ring	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −362%	60−65 +362%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Dota 2	16−18 −369%	75−80 +369%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Fortnite	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Valorant	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%

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

Pro 5500 XT is 363% faster in 900p
Pro 5500 XT is 355% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.50	21.41
Recency	30 May 2013	4 August 2020
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	125 Watt

GTX 760M has 127.3% lower power consumption.

Pro 5500 XT, on the other hand, has a 375.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

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

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

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