Radeon HD 6990M Crossfire vs Pro 555X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro 555X with Radeon HD 6990M Crossfire, including specs and performance data.
HD 6990M Crossfire outperforms Pro 555X by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 564 | 517 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 7.91 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 21 | Blackcomb XTX |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 16 July 2018 (7 years ago) | 12 July 2011 (14 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 | 2240 |
| Core clock speed | 907 MHz | 715 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 2x1700 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 43.54 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.393 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 48 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | no data |
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 | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2x2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1275 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 81.6 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | No outputs | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 11 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | - |
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 | 80−85
−23.8%
| 99
+23.8%
|
| Full HD | 90−95
−20%
| 108
+20%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
−19.5%
|
45−50
+19.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
−19.5%
|
45−50
+19.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
−18.8%
|
35−40
+18.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
−16.7%
|
55−60
+16.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−14.3%
|
40−45
+14.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
−21.7%
|
27−30
+21.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−17.9%
|
30−35
+17.9%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−11.1%
|
90−95
+11.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
−19.5%
|
45−50
+19.5%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
−13.7%
|
140−150
+13.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
−11.7%
|
65−70
+11.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
−18.8%
|
35−40
+18.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
−16.7%
|
55−60
+16.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−14.3%
|
40−45
+14.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 21−24
−21.7%
|
27−30
+21.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
−17.2%
|
30−35
+17.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−17.9%
|
30−35
+17.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
−20%
|
24−27
+20%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−11.1%
|
90−95
+11.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
−20.6%
|
40−45
+20.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
−11.7%
|
65−70
+11.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
−18.8%
|
35−40
+18.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−20%
|
30−33
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−14.3%
|
40−45
+14.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
−17.9%
|
30−35
+17.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 20−22
−20%
|
24−27
+20%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
−11.1%
|
90−95
+11.1%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
−16.7%
|
55−60
+16.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
−16.7%
|
70−75
+16.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10
−33.3%
|
12−14
+33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−14.3%
|
45−50
+14.3%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−15.9%
|
100−110
+15.9%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
−29.4%
|
21−24
+29.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
−20%
|
18−20
+20%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−15.8%
|
21−24
+15.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
−18.2%
|
12−14
+18.2%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
−18.8%
|
18−20
+18.8%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
−11.1%
|
20−22
+11.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−20%
|
45−50
+20%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−37.5%
|
10−12
+37.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 27−30
−17.2%
|
30−35
+17.2%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8−9
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−15.4%
|
14−16
+15.4%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
This is how Pro 555X and HD 6990M Crossfire compete in popular games:
- HD 6990M Crossfire is 24% faster in 900p
- HD 6990M Crossfire is 20% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6990M Crossfire is 67% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, HD 6990M Crossfire surpassed Pro 555X in all 64 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.66 | 9.02 |
| Recency | 16 July 2018 | 12 July 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
Pro 555X has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
HD 6990M Crossfire, on the other hand, has a 17.8% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon HD 6990M Crossfire is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6990M Crossfire 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.
