Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics vs GeForce GTX 660
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GTX 660 outperforms Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics by a whopping 754% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 402 | 1009 |
| Place by popularity | 69 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.37 | 0.13 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) |
| GPU code name | GK106 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 September 2012 (11 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $229 | no data |
| Current price | $172 (0.8x MSRP) | $105 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 660 has 1723% better value for money than HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 960 | 736 |
| CUDA cores | 960 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 980 MHz | 655 / 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1033 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,540 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 140 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 78.4 billion/sec | no data |
| Floating-point performance | 1,981 gflops | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 660 and Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | One 6-pin | no data |
| SLI options | + | 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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 192-bit GDDR5 | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6.0 GB/s | 1800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 144.2 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | no data | + |
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 | One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort | no data |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| HDCP | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Blu-Ray | + | no data |
| 3D Gaming | + | no data |
| 3D Vision | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | no data |
| CUDA | + | no data |
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 | 47
+840%
| 5−6
−840%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.33 | 1.21 |
| Recency | 6 September 2012 | 15 May 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
The GeForce GTX 660 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 660 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
