GeForce MX550 vs GTX 775M

Place in the ranking	471	411
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.51	32.45
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	N13E-GTX-A2	TU117S
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	24 September 2013 (11 years ago)	17 December 2021 (3 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 cores	1344	1024
Core clock speed	719 MHz	1065 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1320 MHz
Number of transistors	3540 Million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	42.24
Floating-point processing power	no data	2.703 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	16
TMUs	no data	32

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	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	3600 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	96 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 Connectors

no data

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.7 (6.4)
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	3.0
Vulkan	-	1.3
CUDA	+	7.5

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 775M 9.45

GeForce MX550 11.77
+24.6%

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.

GTX 775M 3634

GeForce MX550 4525
+24.5%

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.

GTX 775M 6071

GeForce MX550 10005
+64.8%

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	35−40 −31.4%	46 +31.4%
4K	21−24 −33.3%	28 +33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −17.6%	20−22 +17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 −21.1%	21−24 +21.1%
Elden Ring	27−30 −28.6%	36 +28.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −17.6%	20−22 +17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +58.3%	12 −58.3%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −57.9%	60 +57.9%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −23.1%	30−35 +23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
Valorant	35−40 −30.6%	45−50 +30.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −17.6%	20−22 +17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +111%	9 −111%
Dota 2	30−35 −118%	74 +118%
Elden Ring	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −79.5%	70 +79.5%
Fortnite	55−60 −23.6%	65−70 +23.6%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −36.8%	52 +36.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −61.8%	55 +61.8%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −23.1%	30−35 +23.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −20.3%	85−90 +20.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −20%	30−33 +20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −24.1%	35−40 +24.1%
Valorant	35−40 −30.6%	45−50 +30.6%
World of Tanks	130−140 −18.1%	160−170 +18.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −22.6%	35−40 +22.6%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −17.6%	20−22 +17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +375%	4 −375%
Dota 2	30−35 −206%	104 +206%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −17.9%	45−50 +17.9%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −10.5%	42 +10.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 −20.3%	85−90 +20.3%
Valorant	35−40 −30.6%	45−50 +30.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Elden Ring	12−14 −30.8%	16−18 +30.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 −41.7%	16−18 +41.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −44.4%	65−70 +44.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −25%	10−11 +25%
World of Tanks	65−70 −23.5%	80−85 +23.5%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 −27.8%	21−24 +27.8%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 −28.6%	9−10 +28.6%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −35%	27−30 +35%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −33.3%	27−30 +33.3%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −41.2%	24−27 +41.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −23.1%	16−18 +23.1%
Valorant	24−27 −20.8%	27−30 +20.8%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Dota 2	20−22 −10%	21−24 +10%
Elden Ring	6−7 −16.7%	7−8 +16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22 −10%	21−24 +10%
Metro Exodus	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −25.9%	30−35 +25.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 −33.3%	8−9 +33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22 −10%	21−24 +10%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −37.5%	10−12 +37.5%
Counter-Strike 2	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 −10%	21−24 +10%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −27.3%	14−16 +27.3%
Fortnite	10−11 −30%	12−14 +30%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −33.3%	16−18 +33.3%
Valorant	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%

This is how GTX 775M and GeForce MX550 compete in popular games:

GeForce MX550 is 31% faster in 1080p
GeForce MX550 is 33% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 775M is 375% faster.
in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce MX550 is 206% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 775M is ahead in 3 tests (5%)
GeForce MX550 is ahead in 58 tests (92%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.45	11.77
Recency	24 September 2013	17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	25 Watt

GTX 775M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GeForce MX550, on the other hand, has a 24.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

The GeForce MX550 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 775M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.