Radeon 840M vs GeForce MX550

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX550 and Radeon 840M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce MX550
2021
2 GB GDDR6, 25 Watt
11.36
+4.5%

MX550 outperforms 840M by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking445456
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency32.14no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 3+ (2024)
GPU code nameTU117SKrackan Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date17 December 2021 (3 years ago)2 June 2024 (less than a year 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 cores1024256
Core clock speed1065 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1320 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Wattno data
Texture fill rate42.24no data
Floating-point processing power2.703 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount2 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1500 MHz7500 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno data
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 Dependentno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-
CUDA7.5-

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.

GeForce MX550 11.36
+4.5%
Radeon 840M 10.87

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.

GeForce MX550 4535
+4.5%
Radeon 840M 4341

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.

GeForce MX550 10005
+18.4%
Radeon 840M 8453

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce MX550 36560
+27.3%
Radeon 840M 28720

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.

GeForce MX550 6126
+9.3%
Radeon 840M 5606

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce MX550 40364
+8%
Radeon 840M 37360

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 HD46
+64.3%
28
−64.3%
4K28
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 21−24
−9.5%
23
+9.5%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−40%
84
+40%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 21−24
+10.5%
19
−10.5%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
−13.3%
68
+13.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Far Cry 5 45
+28.6%
35−40
−28.6%
Fortnite 65−70
+3.2%
60−65
−3.2%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Forza Horizon 5 47
+46.9%
30−35
−46.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
Valorant 100−105
+2%
95−100
−2%

Full HD
High Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 21−24
+61.5%
13
−61.5%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+300%
15
−300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+3.2%
150−160
−3.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Dota 2 111
+11%
100−105
−11%
Far Cry 5 38
+8.6%
35−40
−8.6%
Fortnite 65−70
+3.2%
60−65
−3.2%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Forza Horizon 5 31
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 55
+71.9%
32
−71.9%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+4.8%
21−24
−4.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+85.2%
27−30
−85.2%
Valorant 100−105
+2%
95−100
−2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 21−24
+61.5%
13
−61.5%
Battlefield 5 45−50
+4.3%
45−50
−4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Dota 2 104
+9.5%
95−100
−9.5%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+5.3%
35−40
−5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+5.3%
95−100
−5.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+3.2%
60−65
−3.2%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+3.8%
80−85
−3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+5.5%
55−60
−5.5%
Valorant 120−130
+3.4%
110−120
−3.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+4.5%
21−24
−4.5%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+8%
24−27
−8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+9.1%
21−24
−9.1%

4K
High Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Valorant 55−60
+5.4%
55−60
−5.4%

4K
Ultra Preset

Baldur's Gate 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+14.3%
35−40
−14.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+5.6%
18−20
−5.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

This is how GeForce MX550 and Radeon 840M compete in popular games:

  • GeForce MX550 is 64% faster in 1080p
  • GeForce MX550 is 17% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce MX550 is 300% faster.
  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 840M is 40% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce MX550 is ahead in 45 tests (75%)
  • Radeon 840M is ahead in 4 tests (7%)
  • there's a draw in 11 tests (18%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.36 10.87
Recency 17 December 2021 2 June 2024
Chip lithography 12 nm 4 nm

GeForce MX550 has a 4.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 840M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 200% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce MX550 and Radeon 840M.

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 MX550
GeForce MX550
AMD Radeon 840M
Radeon 840M

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.


3.5 861 votes

Rate GeForce MX550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 11 votes

Rate Radeon 840M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce MX550 or Radeon 840M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.