Radeon 760M vs Pro 555X

Place in the ranking	505	356
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	7.72	68.01
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Polaris 21	Hawx Point
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	16 July 2018 (6 years ago)	6 December 2023 (1 year 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	768	512
Core clock speed	907 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2599 MHz
Number of transistors	3,000 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	43.54	83.17
Floating-point processing power	1.393 TFLOPS	5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	48	32
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	8

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	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 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	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1275 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	81.6 GB/s	no data
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

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3

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 555X 8.41

Radeon 760M 14.82
+76.2%

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 555X 3235

Radeon 760M 5696
+76.1%

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 HD	16−18 −93.8%	31 +93.8%
1440p	10−12 −90%	19 +90%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −56.3%	25 +56.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −87.5%	30 +87.5%
Elden Ring	21−24 −95.7%	45−50 +95.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −77.8%	45−50 +77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −18.8%	19 +18.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +33.3%	12 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −50%	51 +50%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −86.4%	40−45 +86.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −56.5%	35−40 +56.5%
Valorant	30−33 −96.7%	55−60 +96.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −77.8%	45−50 +77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −12.5%	18 +12.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +77.8%	9 −77.8%
Dota 2	30−33 +30.4%	23 −30.4%
Elden Ring	21−24 −95.7%	45−50 +95.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +24.1%	29 −24.1%
Fortnite	45−50 −69.4%	80−85 +69.4%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −29.4%	44 +29.4%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−33 −13.3%	34 +13.3%
Metro Exodus	21−24 −86.4%	40−45 +86.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −59.7%	100−110 +59.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 −56.5%	35−40 +56.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −73.1%	45−50 +73.1%
Valorant	30−33 −96.7%	55−60 +96.7%
World of Tanks	120−130 −52.4%	190−200 +52.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −77.8%	45−50 +77.8%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −62.5%	24−27 +62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 −81.3%	27−30 +81.3%
Dota 2	30−33 −76.7%	50−55 +76.7%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −52.8%	55−60 +52.8%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −8.8%	37 +8.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 −59.7%	100−110 +59.7%
Valorant	30−33 −96.7%	55−60 +96.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Elden Ring	10−12 −109%	21−24 +109%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−11 −120%	21−24 +120%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 −212%	130−140 +212%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −85.7%	12−14 +85.7%
World of Tanks	60−65 −70.5%	100−110 +70.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −100%	30−33 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −83.3%	10−12 +83.3%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −100%	35−40 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −112%	35−40 +112%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −129%	30−35 +129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −90%	18−20 +90%
Valorant	21−24 −76.2%	35−40 +76.2%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Dota 2	18−20 −36.8%	24−27 +36.8%
Elden Ring	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 −36.8%	24−27 +36.8%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 −83.3%	40−45 +83.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −36.8%	24−27 +36.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 −100%	14−16 +100%
Counter-Strike 2	2−3 −400%	10−11 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Dota 2	18−20 −36.8%	24−27 +36.8%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −90%	18−20 +90%
Fortnite	8−9 −113%	16−18 +113%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −110%	21−24 +110%
Valorant	8−9 −100%	16−18 +100%

This is how Pro 555X and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

Radeon 760M is 94% faster in 1080p
Radeon 760M is 90% faster in 1440p

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Pro 555X is 78% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 760M is 400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Pro 555X is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
Radeon 760M is ahead in 59 tests (94%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.41	14.82
Recency	16 July 2018	6 December 2023
Chip lithography	14 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 76.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Pro 555X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 555X is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 760M 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.