Radeon RX 6550M vs GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile

Place in the ranking	110	219
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	18.19	21.67
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU104B	Navi 24
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	29 January 2019 (6 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 cores	2944	1024
Core clock speed	1380 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1590 MHz	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	13,600 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	292.6	181.8
Floating-point processing power	9.362 TFLOPS	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	184	64
Tensor Cores	368	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	46	16

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	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	14000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	384.0 GB/s	144.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	Portable Device Dependent
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

RTX 2080 Mobile 39.56
+57.4%

RX 6550M 25.14

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.

RTX 2080 Mobile 34897
+70.2%

RX 6550M 20506

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.

RTX 2080 Mobile 25436
+73.1%

RX 6550M 14696

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RTX 2080 Mobile 9854
+117%

RX 6550M 4546

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	142 +109%	68 −109%
1440p	93 +288%	24 −288%
4K	65 +62.5%	40−45 −62.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	80−85 +56.6%	53 −56.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +66.7%	50−55 −66.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	95 +23.4%	75−80 −23.4%
Counter-Strike 2	80−85 +80.4%	46 −80.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	47 −8.5%	50−55 +8.5%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +56.1%	123 −56.1%
Forza Horizon 5	100−110 +53%	65−70 −53%
Metro Exodus	102 +54.5%	65−70 −54.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	122 +122%	55−60 −122%
Valorant	237 +135%	100−110 −135%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	149 +93.5%	75−80 −93.5%
Counter-Strike 2	80−85 +137%	35 −137%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 −30.8%	50−55 +30.8%
Dota 2	111 +29.1%	85−90 −29.1%
Far Cry 5	75 +127%	33 −127%
Fortnite	170−180 +36.5%	120−130 −36.5%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +90.1%	101 −90.1%
Forza Horizon 5	100−110 +53%	65−70 −53%
Grand Theft Auto V	101 +17.4%	85−90 −17.4%
Metro Exodus	87 +31.8%	65−70 −31.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	249 +57.6%	150−160 −57.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	71 +29.1%	55−60 −29.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	140−150 +70.7%	80−85 −70.7%
Valorant	135 +33.7%	100−110 −33.7%
World of Tanks	270−280 +8.1%	250−260 −8.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	79 +2.6%	75−80 −2.6%
Counter-Strike 2	80−85 +186%	29 −186%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 −50%	50−55 +50%
Dota 2	125 +45.3%	85−90 −45.3%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +26%	75−80 −26%
Forza Horizon 4	190−200 +118%	88 −118%
Forza Horizon 5	100−110 +53%	65−70 −53%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	135 −17%	150−160 +17%
Valorant	205 +103%	100−110 −103%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	70−75 +73.8%	40−45 −73.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	70−75 +72.1%	40−45 −72.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	44 +91.3%	21−24 −91.3%
World of Tanks	250−260 +51.2%	160−170 −51.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	83 +62.7%	50−55 −62.7%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +135%	17 −135%
Cyberpunk 2077	23 +9.5%	21−24 −9.5%
Far Cry 5	120−130 +75.3%	70−75 −75.3%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +70.1%	65−70 −70.1%
Forza Horizon 5	65−70 +65%	40−45 −65%
Metro Exodus	89 +56.1%	55−60 −56.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +86.5%	35−40 −86.5%
Valorant	142 +109%	65−70 −109%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +78.3%	21−24 −78.3%
Dota 2	75−80 +77.3%	40−45 −77.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	75−80 +77.3%	40−45 −77.3%
Metro Exodus	35 +84.2%	18−20 −84.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	144 +87%	75−80 −87%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30 +87.5%	16−18 −87.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80 +77.3%	40−45 −77.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	52 +100%	24−27 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	40−45 +78.3%	21−24 −78.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Dota 2	119 +170%	40−45 −170%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +78.8%	30−35 −78.8%
Fortnite	63 +103%	30−35 −103%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +66.7%	35−40 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 5	35−40 +76.2%	21−24 −76.2%
Valorant	75 +127%	30−35 −127%

This is how RTX 2080 Mobile and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RTX 2080 Mobile is 109% faster in 1080p
RTX 2080 Mobile is 288% faster in 1440p
RTX 2080 Mobile is 63% faster in 4K

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 2080 Mobile is 186% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6550M is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 2080 Mobile is ahead in 59 tests (92%)
RX 6550M is ahead in 4 tests (6%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	39.56	25.14
Recency	29 January 2019	4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	80 Watt