Radeon RX 6550M vs FirePro W5170M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W5170M with Radeon RX 6550M, including specs and performance data.

W5170M
2014
2 GB GDDR5
5.69

RX 6550M outperforms W5170M by a whopping 344% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking610221
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data21.69
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTropoNavi 24
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date25 August 2014 (10 years ago)4 January 2023 (2 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores6401024
Core clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz2840 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data80 Watt
Texture fill rate37.00181.8
Floating-point processing power1.184 TFLOPS5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs4064
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s144.0 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
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.

W5170M 5.69
RX 6550M 25.27
+344%

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.

W5170M 2191
RX 6550M 9738
+344%

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.

W5170M 4197
RX 6550M 20506
+389%

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.

W5170M 2909
RX 6550M 14696
+405%

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 HD27
−148%
67
+148%
1440p5−6
−420%
26
+420%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−342%
53
+342%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−364%
50−55
+364%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−327%
90−95
+327%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−275%
45
+275%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−364%
50−55
+364%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−469%
91
+469%
Fortnite 30−35
−269%
110−120
+269%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−292%
90−95
+292%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−458%
65−70
+458%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
−360%
90−95
+360%
Valorant 60−65
−156%
160−170
+156%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
−400%
65−70
+400%
Battlefield 5 21−24
−327%
90−95
+327%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−192%
35
+192%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
−180%
250−260
+180%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−364%
50−55
+364%
Dota 2 45−50
−169%
120−130
+169%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−425%
84
+425%
Fortnite 30−35
−269%
110−120
+269%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−292%
90−95
+292%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−458%
65−70
+458%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
−358%
85−90
+358%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−420%
50−55
+420%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
−360%
90−95
+360%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
−453%
83
+453%
Valorant 60−65
−156%
160−170
+156%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−327%
90−95
+327%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
−142%
29
+142%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−364%
50−55
+364%
Dota 2 45−50
−169%
120−130
+169%
Far Cry 5 16−18
−394%
79
+394%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−292%
90−95
+292%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−458%
65−70
+458%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
−360%
90−95
+360%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−227%
49
+227%
Valorant 60−65
−156%
160−170
+156%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
−269%
110−120
+269%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
−307%
160−170
+307%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
−617%
40−45
+617%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−700%
30−35
+700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
−400%
170−180
+400%
Valorant 60−65
−238%
200−210
+238%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
−843%
65−70
+843%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−440%
50−55
+440%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−369%
60−65
+369%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
−425%
40−45
+425%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−400%
40−45
+400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
−409%
55−60
+409%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
−280%
18−20
+280%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 10−12
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−159%
40−45
+159%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
Valorant 27−30
−411%
130−140
+411%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 10−12
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−400%
10−11
+400%
Dota 2 18−20
−311%
75−80
+311%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−440%
27−30
+440%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−425%
40−45
+425%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
−633%
21−24
+633%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−400%
24−27
+400%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
−420%
24−27
+420%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High Preset

Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

This is how W5170M and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

  • RX 6550M is 148% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6550M is 420% faster in 1440p

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 RX 6550M is 1650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6550M is ahead in 63 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.69 25.27
Recency 25 August 2014 4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm

RX 6550M has a 344.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the FirePro W5170M in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W5170M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6550M is a mobile workstation 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.


AMD FirePro W5170M
FirePro W5170M
AMD Radeon RX 6550M
Radeon RX 6550M

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.


3.4 89 votes

Rate FirePro W5170M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 283 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about FirePro W5170M or Radeon RX 6550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.