Radeon RX 5500M vs E8950

Place in the ranking	368	360
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	10.30	11.82
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	Amethyst	Navi 14
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	29 September 2015 (9 years ago)	7 October 2019 (5 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	2048	1408
Core clock speed	735 MHz	1375 MHz
Boost clock speed	1000 MHz	1645 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	85 Watt
Texture fill rate	128.0	144.8
Floating-point processing power	4.096 TFLOPS	4.632 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	128	88

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	medium sized
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	224.0 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.3	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	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:

Full HD	55−60 −5.5%	58 +5.5%
1440p	60−65 −5%	63 +5%
4K	27−30 −11.1%	30 +11.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	43 +0%	43 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	55 +0%	55 +0%
Elden Ring	36 +0%	36 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	36 +0%	36 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40 +0%	40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	101 +0%	101 +0%
Metro Exodus	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	57 +0%	57 +0%
Valorant	108 +0%	108 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30 +0%	30 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	31 +0%	31 +0%
Dota 2	88 +0%	88 +0%
Elden Ring	63 +0%	63 +0%
Far Cry 5	35 +0%	35 +0%
Fortnite	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	82 +0%	82 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	79 +0%	79 +0%
Metro Exodus	16 +0%	16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	88 +0%	88 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	32 +0%	32 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Valorant	57 +0%	57 +0%
World of Tanks	191 +0%	191 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 +0%	27 +0%
Dota 2	103 +0%	103 +0%
Far Cry 5	90 +0%	90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	72 +0%	72 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Valorant	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Elden Ring	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	175 +0%	175 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
World of Tanks	137 +0%	137 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8 +0%	8 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	47 +0%	47 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	20 +0%	20 +0%
Elden Ring	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20 +0%	20 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	72 +0%	72 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +0%	20 +0%
World of Tanks	76 +0%	76 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3 +0%
Dota 2	53 +0%	53 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Fortnite	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Valorant	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

This is how Radeon E8950 and RX 5500M compete in popular games:

RX 5500M is 5% faster in 1080p
RX 5500M is 5% faster in 1440p
RX 5500M is 11% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.21	14.59
Recency	29 September 2015	7 October 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	95 Watt	85 Watt

Radeon E8950 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

RX 5500M, on the other hand, has a 2.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 11.8% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon E8950 and Radeon RX 5500M.

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