Radeon RX 6550M vs ATI Mobility HD 3650
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3650 and Radeon RX 6550M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 6550M outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3650 by a whopping 6939% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1301 | 224 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.82 | 21.72 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024) |
| GPU code name | M86 | Navi 24 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2008 (17 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 | 120 | 1024 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2840 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 378 million | 5,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 80 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 181.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.12 TFLOPS | 5.816 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 32 |
| TMUs | 8 | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 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 | medium sized | medium sized |
| Interface | MXM-II | 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 22.4 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
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 | 0−1 | 69 |
| 1440p | -0−1 | 25 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−3150%
|
65−70
+3150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−5100%
|
50−55
+5100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−3150%
|
65−70
+3150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−5100%
|
50−55
+5100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1229%
|
90−95
+1229%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−507%
|
160−170
+507%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−3150%
|
65−70
+3150%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1721%
|
250−260
+1721%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−5100%
|
50−55
+5100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1110%
|
120−130
+1110%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1229%
|
90−95
+1229%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−1975%
|
83
+1975%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−507%
|
160−170
+507%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−5100%
|
50−55
+5100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−1110%
|
120−130
+1110%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−3067%
|
95−100
+3067%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−1229%
|
90−95
+1229%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−1125%
|
49
+1125%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−507%
|
160−170
+507%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−5733%
|
170−180
+5733%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 24−27 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−6000%
|
60−65
+6000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 40−45 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 55−60 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−193%
|
40−45
+193%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−6850%
|
130−140
+6850%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2600%
|
27−30
+2600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1200%
|
24−27
+1200%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 91
+0%
|
91
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 84
+0%
|
84
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Valorant | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6550M is 6850% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 6550M is ahead in 28 tests (47%)
- there's a draw in 32 tests (53%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.31 | 21.82 |
| Recency | 7 January 2008 | 4 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 80 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3650 has 166.7% lower power consumption.
RX 6550M, on the other hand, has a 6938.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 816.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3650 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
