Arc A380 vs Radeon Pro 5500M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 5500M with Arc A380, including specs and performance data.

Pro 5500M
2019
8 GB GDDR6, 85 Watt
17.55
+9.1%

Pro 5500M outperforms Arc A380 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking305328
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.64
Power efficiency14.3014.86
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameNavi 14DG2-128
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date13 November 2019 (4 years ago)14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores15361024
Core clock speed1000 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed1450 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors6,400 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate139.2131.2
Floating-point processing power4.454 TFLOPS4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs9664
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s186.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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.

Pro 5500M 17.55
+9.1%
Arc A380 16.09

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.

Pro 5500M 6774
+9.1%
Arc A380 6208

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.

Pro 5500M 14725
+6%
Arc A380 13892

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.

Pro 5500M 10399
+2.2%
Arc A380 10174

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.

Pro 5500M 65776
+8.2%
Arc A380 60804

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.

Pro 5500M 364184
Arc A380 466666
+28.1%

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 HD56
+14.3%
49
−14.3%
1440p54
+20%
45−50
−20%
4K33
+10%
30−35
−10%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.04
1440pno data3.31
4Kno data4.97

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−52.5%
61
+52.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−72.4%
50
+72.4%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−67.2%
95−100
+67.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−69.4%
60−65
+69.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−63.4%
65−70
+63.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−58.3%
75−80
+58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−46.4%
160−170
+46.4%
Hitman 3 30−35
−82.4%
60−65
+82.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−51.7%
130−140
+51.7%
Metro Exodus 60−65
−65.6%
100−110
+65.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 75
+0%
75−80
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
−77.6%
100−110
+77.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−32.9%
110−120
+32.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−80%
72
+80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−27.6%
37
+27.6%
Battlefield 5 55−60
−67.2%
95−100
+67.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50
−22%
60−65
+22%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−63.4%
65−70
+63.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
−58.3%
75−80
+58.3%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
−46.4%
160−170
+46.4%
Hitman 3 30−35
−82.4%
60−65
+82.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
−51.7%
130−140
+51.7%
Metro Exodus 32
−216%
100−110
+216%
Red Dead Redemption 2 51
−47.1%
75−80
+47.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
−37.9%
80
+37.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
−53.7%
60−65
+53.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−32.9%
110−120
+32.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
+37.9%
29
−37.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
−6.9%
31
+6.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35
−74.3%
60−65
+74.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−63.4%
65−70
+63.4%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+96.5%
57
−96.5%
Hitman 3 30−35
−82.4%
60−65
+82.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 85−90
+67.3%
52
−67.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
−5.2%
61
+5.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+14.7%
34
−14.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+240%
25
−240%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 54
−38.9%
75−80
+38.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
−64.7%
55−60
+64.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
−66.7%
45−50
+66.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
−72.2%
30−35
+72.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
−107%
30−35
+107%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−78.9%
30−35
+78.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 20−22
−70%
30−35
+70%
Forza Horizon 4 95−100
−78.1%
170−180
+78.1%
Hitman 3 21−24
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−72.2%
60−65
+72.2%
Metro Exodus 41
−39%
55−60
+39%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
−100%
65−70
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−95%
35−40
+95%
Watch Dogs: Legion 115
−39.1%
160−170
+39.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35
−42.9%
50−55
+42.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
−70.6%
27−30
+70.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−84.6%
24−27
+84.6%
Hitman 3 12−14
−84.6%
24−27
+84.6%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−65.6%
140−150
+65.6%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−100%
30−35
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
−90%
18−20
+90%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−88.9%
16−18
+88.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−100%
18−20
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−70%
16−18
+70%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−70.8%
40−45
+70.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−100%
35−40
+100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
−100%
14−16
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16
−62.5%
24−27
+62.5%

This is how Pro 5500M and Arc A380 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5500M is 14% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 5500M is 20% faster in 1440p
  • Pro 5500M is 10% faster in 4K

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5500M is 240% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Arc A380 is 216% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro 5500M is ahead in 5 tests (8%)
  • Arc A380 is ahead in 60 tests (91%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 17.55 16.09
Recency 13 November 2019 14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 75 Watt

Pro 5500M has a 9.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 13.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro 5500M and Arc A380.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 5500M is a mobile workstation card while Arc A380 is a desktop 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 Pro 5500M
Radeon Pro 5500M
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

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.


4 259 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 809 votes

Rate Arc A380 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.