GeForce GT 635M vs Radeon RX 5500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 5500 with GeForce GT 635M, including specs and performance data.

RX 5500
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 110 Watt
22.81
+1484%

RX 5500 outperforms GT 635M by a whopping 1484% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2551003
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.222.82
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameNavi 14GF116
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date7 October 2019 (5 years ago)22 March 2012 (12 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 cores1408Up to 144
Core clock speedno dataUp to 675 MHz
Boost clock speed1845 MHz753 MHz
Number of transistors6,400 million1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)110 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate162.416.20
Floating-point processing power5.196 TFLOPS0.3888 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length180 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR6DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 BitUp to 192bit
Memory clock speed14000 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/sUp to 43.2 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++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

3D Blu-Ray-+
Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12.0 (12_1)12 API
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
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.

RX 5500 22.81
+1484%
GT 635M 1.44

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 8788
+1486%
GT 635M 554

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 42234
+1547%
GT 635M 2565

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 HD350−400
+1358%
24
−1358%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how RX 5500 and GT 635M compete in popular games:

  • RX 5500 is 1358% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 49 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.81 1.44
Recency 7 October 2019 22 March 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 110 Watt 35 Watt

RX 5500 has a 1484% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

GT 635M, on the other hand, has 214.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 635M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 5500 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 635M is a notebook one.

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
Radeon RX 5500
NVIDIA GeForce GT 635M
GeForce GT 635M

Other comparisons

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.


3.7 229 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 473 votes

Rate GeForce GT 635M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 5500 or GeForce GT 635M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.