Radeon 550 vs GeForce GTX 780M SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 780M SLI with Radeon 550, including specs and performance data.

GTX 780M SLI
2013
2x 4 GB GDDR5, 200 Watt
19.53
+257%

GTX 780M SLI outperforms 550 by a whopping 257% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking288611
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.37
Power efficiency6.727.53
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameN14E-GTXLexa
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)20 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores3072512
Core clock speed823 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1183 MHz
Number of transistors7080 Million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)200 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data37.86
Floating-point processing powerno data1.211 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2x 4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2x 256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed5000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data56 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

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.

DirectX1112 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA+-

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 HD98
+263%
27−30
−263%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.93

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+289%
9−10
−289%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Elden Ring 60−65
+288%
16−18
−288%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+288%
16−18
−288%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+289%
9−10
−289%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+290%
21−24
−290%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+279%
14−16
−279%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
Valorant 75−80
+276%
21−24
−276%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+288%
16−18
−288%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+289%
9−10
−289%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Dota 2 65−70
+283%
18−20
−283%
Elden Ring 60−65
+288%
16−18
−288%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+267%
18−20
−267%
Fortnite 100−110
+285%
27−30
−285%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+290%
21−24
−290%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70
+283%
18−20
−283%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+279%
14−16
−279%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+277%
35−40
−277%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+275%
12−14
−275%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65
+281%
16−18
−281%
Valorant 75−80
+276%
21−24
−276%
World of Tanks 257
+267%
70−75
−267%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+288%
16−18
−288%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+289%
9−10
−289%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+290%
10−11
−290%
Dota 2 65−70
+283%
18−20
−283%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+267%
18−20
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+290%
21−24
−290%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+277%
35−40
−277%
Valorant 75−80
+276%
21−24
−276%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%
Elden Ring 30−35
+300%
8−9
−300%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+288%
8−9
−288%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+278%
45−50
−278%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+260%
5−6
−260%
World of Tanks 130−140
+280%
35−40
−280%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+271%
14−16
−271%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+257%
14−16
−257%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+267%
12−14
−267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%
Valorant 50−55
+257%
14−16
−257%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Dota 2 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Elden Ring 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+280%
5−6
−280%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Dota 2 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%
Fortnite 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Valorant 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%

This is how GTX 780M SLI and Radeon 550 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 780M SLI is 263% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.53 5.47
Recency 30 May 2013 20 April 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 200 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 780M SLI has a 257% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 550, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 780M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 550 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 780M SLI is a notebook card while Radeon 550 is a desktop one.


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

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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M SLI
GeForce GTX 780M SLI
AMD Radeon 550
Radeon 550

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 5 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 780M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 30 votes

Rate Radeon 550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.