Radeon 530 vs RX 5500 XT

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 5500 XT with Radeon 530, including specs and performance data.

RX 5500 XT
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 130 Watt
23.71
+791%

RX 5500 XT outperforms 530 by a whopping 791% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking235812
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation48.17no data
Power efficiency12.513.65
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameNavi 14Weston
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 December 2019 (5 years ago)18 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$169 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 cores1408384
Core clock speed1607 MHz730 MHz
Boost clock speed1845 MHz1024 MHz
Number of transistors6,400 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate162.424.58
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPS0.7864 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs8824

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x8
Length180 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR6DDR3/GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed14000 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.56.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131

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.

RX 5500 XT 23.71
+791%
Radeon 530 2.66

  • Passmark
  • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
  • 3DMark Vantage Performance
  • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
  • 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
  • GeekBench 5 OpenCL
  • 3DMark Ice Storm GPU
  • Unigine Heaven 3.0

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 9130
+790%
Radeon 530 1026

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
+738%
Radeon 530 2327

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
+980%
Radeon 530 6338

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
+828%
Radeon 530 1542

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
+840%
Radeon 530 9210

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

RX 5500 XT 44551
+788%
Radeon 530 5015

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX 5500 XT 560812
+422%
Radeon 530 107458

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

RX 5500 XT 61298
+360476%
Radeon 530 17

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
+407%
15
−407%
1440p42
+950%
4−5
−950%
4K24
+1100%
2−3
−1100%

Cost per frame, $

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 78
+1460%
5−6
−1460%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+225%
16
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 72 0−1
Battlefield 5 75−80
+1850%
4−5
−1850%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+500%
8
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 61
+1120%
5−6
−1120%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+450%
10
−450%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+417%
12
−417%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+300%
35
−300%
Hitman 3 64
+814%
7−8
−814%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+424%
21−24
−424%
Metro Exodus 132
+915%
13
−915%
Red Dead Redemption 2 108
+731%
13
−731%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+344%
18
−344%
Watch Dogs: Legion 202
+432%
35−40
−432%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 66
+633%
9−10
−633%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 58 0−1
Battlefield 5 75−80
+1850%
4−5
−1850%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+586%
7
−586%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+800%
5−6
−800%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
+786%
7−8
−786%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+338%
32
−338%
Hitman 3 62
+786%
7−8
−786%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+424%
21−24
−424%
Metro Exodus 94
+1780%
5
−1780%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+589%
9
−589%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 108
+882%
10−12
−882%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+300%
12−14
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 202
+432%
35−40
−432%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+478%
9−10
−478%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 49 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50
+700%
6−7
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+700%
5−6
−700%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 56
+331%
12−14
−331%
Hitman 3 55
+686%
7−8
−686%
Horizon Zero Dawn 87
+314%
21−24
−314%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 95
+764%
10−12
−764%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+867%
6
−867%
Watch Dogs: Legion 36
−5.6%
35−40
+5.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 76
+1167%
6−7
−1167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+1025%
4−5
−1025%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+800%
4−5
−800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 37
+825%
4−5
−825%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+800%
3−4
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+864%
14−16
−864%
Hitman 3 36
+350%
8−9
−350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65
+829%
7−8
−829%
Metro Exodus 60
+900%
6−7
−900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 66
+843%
7−8
−843%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Watch Dogs: Legion 184
+1127%
14−16
−1127%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 49
+717%
6−7
−717%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Hitman 3 26
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+917%
12−14
−917%
Metro Exodus 37
+825%
4−5
−825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+933%
3−4
−933%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 8 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+950%
2−3
−950%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 38
+850%
4−5
−850%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24
+500%
4−5
−500%

This is how RX 5500 XT and Radeon 530 compete in popular games:

  • RX 5500 XT is 407% faster in 1080p
  • RX 5500 XT is 950% faster in 1440p
  • RX 5500 XT is 1100% faster in 4K

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

  • in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 5500 XT is 2200% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 530 is 6% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 5500 XT is ahead in 56 tests (98%)
  • Radeon 530 is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 23.71 2.66
Recency 12 December 2019 18 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 50 Watt

RX 5500 XT has a 791.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

Radeon 530, on the other hand, has 160% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 5500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 530 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 5500 XT is a desktop card while Radeon 530 is a notebook one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX 5500 XT
Radeon RX 5500 XT
AMD Radeon 530
Radeon 530

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 2924 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 729 votes

Rate Radeon 530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.