GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile vs Radeon Pro W5500
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro W5500 with GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Pro W5500 outperforms GTX 1060 Mobile by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 241 | 287 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 45.17 | 27.63 |
| Power efficiency | 13.07 | 16.99 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Navi 14 | GP106 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 10 February 2020 (4 years ago) | 15 August 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $399 | $237.11 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Pro W5500 has 63% better value for money than GTX 1060 Mobile.
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 | 1408 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 1187 MHz | 1506 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1400 MHz | 1708 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 6,400 million | 4,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 94 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 123.2 | 133.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.942 TFLOPS | 4.275 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 48 |
| TMUs | 88 | 80 |
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 | large |
| Bus support | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 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 | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 2002 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 192 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 | 4x DisplayPort | DP 1.43, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDCP | - | 2.2 |
| G-SYNC support | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | - | + |
| GPU Boost | no data | 3.0 |
| VR Ready | no data | + |
| Ansel | - | + |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | + |
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 | 80−85
+17.6%
| 68
−17.6%
|
| 1440p | 50−55
+13.6%
| 44
−13.6%
|
| 4K | 35−40
+16.7%
| 30
−16.7%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 4.99
−43%
| 3.49
+43%
|
| 1440p | 7.98
−48.1%
| 5.39
+48.1%
|
| 4K | 11.40
−44.2%
| 7.90
+44.2%
|
- GTX 1060 Mobile has 43% lower cost per frame in 1080p
- GTX 1060 Mobile has 48% lower cost per frame in 1440p
- GTX 1060 Mobile has 44% lower cost per frame in 4K
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 37
+0%
|
37
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 63
+0%
|
63
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 31
+0%
|
31
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 106
+0%
|
106
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 67
+0%
|
67
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 69
+0%
|
69
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 74
+0%
|
74
+0%
|
| Valorant | 86
+0%
|
86
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 73
+0%
|
73
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 70
+0%
|
70
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 94
+0%
|
94
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80
+0%
|
80
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 41
+0%
|
41
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 74
+0%
|
74
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 49
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 204
+0%
|
204
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 27
+0%
|
27
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 75
+0%
|
75
+0%
|
| Valorant | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 222
+0%
|
222
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 118
+0%
|
118
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 68
+0%
|
68
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 55
+0%
|
55
+0%
|
| Valorant | 72
+0%
|
72
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 42
+0%
|
42
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Valorant | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 64
+0%
|
64
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 11
+0%
|
11
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 22
+0%
|
22
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 26
+0%
|
26
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
This is how Pro W5500 and GTX 1060 Mobile compete in popular games:
- Pro W5500 is 18% faster in 1080p
- Pro W5500 is 14% faster in 1440p
- Pro W5500 is 17% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 23.42 | 19.49 |
| Recency | 10 February 2020 | 15 August 2016 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 6 GB |
| Chip lithography | 7 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 80 Watt |
Pro W5500 has a 20.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
GTX 1060 Mobile, on the other hand, has 56.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon Pro W5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Pro W5500 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1060 Mobile is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
