I guess that depends on what workloads you are testing, along with the system configuration. Geekbench is a pretty questionable benchmark that legitimate review sites are not going to use, so it's not exactly something to base meaningful performance numbers off of, at least when comparing processors with different architectures.The Core i5-12400 is faster than the Ryzen 5 5600X, so it makes perfect sense that the Ryzen 5 5500 isn't a match for the hexa-core Alder Lake chip.
The 5600X (and likely the 5600) offers similar performance and pricing to Intel's products around this price range, at least once the adjusted pricing and motherboard costs come into play, so they are viable products. The 5500 is based on the 5600G though, with half the cache and only PCIe 3.0 to allow for the (disabled) integrated graphics, so it performs a little behind those other models, though it's also priced lower to account for that. About the only real issue I see with the 5500 is that it lacks the integrated graphics, which isn't ideal for a more budget-oriented processor, at a time when budget dedicated cards are lacking. Of course, these prices can be reduced further if needed, just as we saw Intel slash prices in response to the Ryzen 5000 series when it first launched a little less than a year and a half ago.meh, those Zen3 core are starting to show their age; nothing to see here
AMD waited too long to drop price / introduce new SKU