Radeon RX 550X Mobile vs Pro WX 4150
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Pro WX 4150 with Radeon RX 550X Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Pro 4150 outperforms 550X Mobile by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 644 | 664 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 9.55 | 8.78 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) |
| GPU code name | Baffin | Polaris 23 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 March 2017 (9 years ago) | 11 April 2018 (8 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 896 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1002 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1053 MHz | 1287 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 2,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 58.97 | 51.48 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.887 TFLOPS | 1.647 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 56 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 224 KB | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 512 KB |
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 | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 96 GB/s | 96 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| FreeSync | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| 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 | 27−30
+3.8%
| 26
−3.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+18.2%
|
10−12
−18.2%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+18.2%
|
10−12
−18.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
−10.5%
|
21
+10.5%
|
| Fortnite | 35−40
+11.8%
|
30−35
−11.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+4.5%
|
65−70
−4.5%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 14−16
+7.1%
|
14−16
−7.1%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−33
+11.1%
|
27−30
−11.1%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 100−110
+7.3%
|
95−100
−7.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+18.2%
|
10−12
−18.2%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
−6%
|
53
+6%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18
−5.6%
|
| Fortnite | 35−40
+11.8%
|
30−35
−11.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 18−20
+12.5%
|
16−18
−12.5%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+15.8%
|
18−20
−15.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−17.6%
|
20
+17.6%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+4.5%
|
65−70
−4.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12−14
+18.2%
|
10−12
−18.2%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+2%
|
49
−2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+26.7%
|
15
−26.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+7.7%
|
24−27
−7.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+30.8%
|
13
−30.8%
|
| Valorant | 65−70
+4.5%
|
65−70
−4.5%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40
+11.8%
|
30−35
−11.8%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
+9.1%
|
40−45
−9.1%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 35−40
+2.6%
|
35−40
−2.6%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
+8.6%
|
55−60
−8.6%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+12.5%
|
24−27
−12.5%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+10%
|
20−22
−10%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
This is how Pro WX 4150 and RX 550X Mobile compete in popular games:
- Pro WX 4150 is 4% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Pro WX 4150 is 33% faster.
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 550X Mobile is 18% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Pro WX 4150 performs better in 49 tests (82%)
- RX 550X Mobile performs better in 3 tests (5%)
- there's a draw in 8 tests (13%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 6.17 | 5.67 |
| Recency | 1 March 2017 | 11 April 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 2 GB |
Pro WX 4150 has a 9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
RX 550X Mobile, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon Pro WX 4150 and Radeon RX 550X Mobile.
Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 4150 is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 550X Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
