Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB vs Arc A550M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Arc A550M with Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, including specs and performance data.

Arc A550M
2022
8 GB GDDR6, 60 Watt
22.40

RX 9060 XT 16 GB outperforms Arc A550M by a whopping 118% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking26470
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data71.38
Power efficiency28.4323.21
ArchitectureGeneration 12.7 (2022−2023)RDNA 4.0 (2025)
GPU code nameDG2-512Navi 44
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date2022 (3 years ago)4 June 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$349

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores20482048
Core clock speed900 MHz1700 MHz
Boost clock speed2050 MHz3130 MHz
Number of transistors21,700 million29,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate262.4400.6
Floating-point processing power8.397 TFLOPS25.64 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs128128
Tensor Cores256no data
Ray Tracing Cores1632

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16PCIe 5.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz2518 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s322.3 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR++

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x HDMI 2.1b, 2x DisplayPort 2.1a
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.66.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan1.31.3
DLSS+-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−111%
280−290
+111%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 50−55
−104%
110−120
+104%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−117%
200−210
+117%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−111%
280−290
+111%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−111%
160−170
+111%
Fortnite 110−120
−117%
250−260
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−115%
200−210
+115%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
−105%
150−160
+105%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−111%
190−200
+111%
Valorant 160−170
−117%
350−400
+117%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−117%
200−210
+117%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
−111%
280−290
+111%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
−117%
550−600
+117%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dota 2 120−130
−117%
260−270
+117%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−111%
160−170
+111%
Fortnite 110−120
−117%
250−260
+117%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−115%
200−210
+115%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
−105%
150−160
+105%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85
−114%
180−190
+114%
Metro Exodus 50−55
−116%
110−120
+116%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−111%
190−200
+111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−106%
140−150
+106%
Valorant 160−170
−117%
350−400
+117%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
−117%
200−210
+117%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Dota 2 120−130
−117%
260−270
+117%
Far Cry 5 75−80
−111%
160−170
+111%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
−115%
200−210
+115%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
−111%
190−200
+111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−106%
140−150
+106%
Valorant 160−170
−117%
350−400
+117%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 110−120
−117%
250−260
+117%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
−100%
100−105
+100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
−113%
350−400
+113%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−107%
85−90
+107%
Metro Exodus 30−35
−110%
65−70
+110%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−101%
350−400
+101%
Valorant 200−210
−99%
400−450
+99%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
−117%
50−55
+117%
Far Cry 5 50−55
−108%
110−120
+108%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
−117%
130−140
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
−116%
80−85
+116%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
−100%
110−120
+100%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
−109%
90−95
+109%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−111%
40−45
+111%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−106%
70−75
+106%
Valorant 130−140
−115%
290−300
+115%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
−108%
75−80
+108%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
−105%
45−50
+105%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−110%
21−24
+110%
Dota 2 75−80
−111%
160−170
+111%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−104%
55−60
+104%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−107%
85−90
+107%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−108%
50−55
+108%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
−100%
50−55
+100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.40 48.78
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 60 Watt 160 Watt

Arc A550M has 166.7% lower power consumption.

RX 9060 XT 16 GB, on the other hand, has a 117.8% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Arc A550M in performance tests.

Be aware that Arc A550M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB is a desktop one.

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.


Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M
AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB
Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB

Other comparisons

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 85 votes

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 193 votes

Rate Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Arc A550M or Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.