Radeon Pro 5300M vs RX 5500M
Aggregate performance score
Pro 5300M outperforms RX 5500M by a small 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 345 | 322 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 9.21 | 3.66 |
| Architecture | Navi / RDNA (2019−2020) | Navi / RDNA (2019−2020) |
| GPU code name | Navi 14 / R19M-E85 | Navi 14 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 29 September 2019 (4 years ago) | 13 November 2019 (4 years ago) |
| Current price | $998 | $2068 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RX 5500M has 152% better value for money than Pro 5300M.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. 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 | 1327 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1645 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 6,400 million | 6,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 144.8 | 100.0 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on Radeon RX 5500M and Radeon Pro 5300M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 12000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 192.0 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 |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
Pro 5300M outperforms RX 5500M by 9% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Pro 5300M outperforms RX 5500M by 9% in Passmark.
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 | 56
−7.1%
| 60−65
+7.1%
|
| 1440p | 52
−5.8%
| 55−60
+5.8%
|
| 4K | 32
+6.7%
| 30−35
−6.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 55
+129%
|
24−27
−129%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 43
+34.4%
|
30−35
−34.4%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 56
+115%
|
24−27
−115%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
−10.9%
|
50−55
+10.9%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 53
+55.9%
|
30−35
−55.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 43
+79.2%
|
24−27
−79.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−7.7%
|
40−45
+7.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
−7.5%
|
40−45
+7.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.3%
|
50−55
+8.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 84
+133%
|
35−40
−133%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 119
+138%
|
50−55
−138%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
−9.3%
|
45−50
+9.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 57
+32.6%
|
40−45
−32.6%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 101
+135%
|
40−45
−135%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 58
+107%
|
27−30
−107%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 40
+25%
|
30−35
−25%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 26
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 34
−50%
|
50−55
+50%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 81
+138%
|
30−35
−138%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 33
+37.5%
|
24−27
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35
−20%
|
40−45
+20%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
−7.5%
|
40−45
+7.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.3%
|
50−55
+8.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 50
+38.9%
|
35−40
−38.9%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 100
+100%
|
50−55
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
−9.3%
|
45−50
+9.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 53
+23.3%
|
40−45
−23.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 68
+58.1%
|
40−45
−58.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 72
+125%
|
30−35
−125%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 51
+82.1%
|
27−30
−82.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 31
−3.2%
|
30−35
+3.2%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 14
−85.7%
|
24−27
+85.7%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 26
−30.8%
|
30−35
+30.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30
+25%
|
24−27
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−7.7%
|
40−45
+7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−8.3%
|
50−55
+8.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 69
+38%
|
50−55
−38%
|
| Metro Exodus | 51
+8.5%
|
45−50
−8.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 45
+40.6%
|
30−35
−40.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 22
−27.3%
|
27−30
+27.3%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 54
+25.6%
|
40−45
−25.6%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 54
+80%
|
30−33
−80%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 52
+79.3%
|
27−30
−79.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 32
+45.5%
|
21−24
−45.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
−10%
|
10−12
+10%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 14−16
−14.3%
|
16−18
+14.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10
−30%
|
12−14
+30%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 30
+57.9%
|
18−20
−57.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 48
+92%
|
24−27
−92%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 55
+77.4%
|
30−35
−77.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 47
+74.1%
|
27−30
−74.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 24−27
−12%
|
27−30
+12%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
4K
High Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35
−6.5%
|
30−35
+6.5%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 28
+75%
|
16−18
−75%
|
| Hitman 3 | 9
−22.2%
|
10−12
+22.2%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 14−16
−13.3%
|
16−18
+13.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 15
+66.7%
|
9−10
−66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−15.4%
|
14−16
+15.4%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 16
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 15
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−10.5%
|
21−24
+10.5%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 25
+47.1%
|
16−18
−47.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 25
+66.7%
|
14−16
−66.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 20
+42.9%
|
14−16
−42.9%
|
This is how RX 5500M and Pro 5300M compete in popular games:
- Pro 5300M is 7% faster in 1080p
- Pro 5300M is 6% faster in 1440p
- RX 5500M is 7% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 5500M is 138% faster than the Pro 5300M.
- in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 86% faster than the RX 5500M.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 5500M is ahead in 38 tests (53%)
- Pro 5300M is ahead in 31 test (43%)
- there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 14.20 | 15.48 |
| Recency | 29 September 2019 | 13 November 2019 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 85 Watt | 65 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon RX 5500M and Radeon Pro 5300M.
Be aware that Radeon RX 5500M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
