Radeon RX 6550M vs Qualcomm Adreno 680

Place in the ranking	861	219
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.97	21.67
Architecture	no data	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	no data	Navi 24
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	6 December 2018 (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	no data	1024
Core clock speed	no data	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	7 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	181.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	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	no data	medium sized
Interface	no data	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	no data	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	no data	4 GB
Memory bus width	no data	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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 data

Portable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.7
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.2
Vulkan	-	1.3

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 2.23

RX 6550M 25.14
+1027%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 857

RX 6550M 9661
+1027%

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.

Qualcomm Adreno 680 1936

RX 6550M 20506
+959%

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	6−7 −1033%	68 +1033%
1440p	2−3 −1100%	24 +1100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −563%	53 +563%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −750%	50−55 +750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −1440%	75−80 +1440%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −475%	46 +475%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −750%	50−55 +750%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −925%	123 +925%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	65−70
Metro Exodus	3−4 −2100%	65−70 +2100%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −1440%	75−80 +1440%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −338%	35 +338%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −750%	50−55 +750%
Dota 2	5−6 −1620%	85−90 +1620%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −136%	33 +136%
Fortnite	12−14 −950%	120−130 +950%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −742%	101 +742%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	65−70
Grand Theft Auto V	5−6 −1620%	85−90 +1620%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −2100%	65−70 +2100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −652%	150−160 +652%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −511%	55−60 +511%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −811%	80−85 +811%
World of Tanks	40−45 −514%	250−260 +514%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −1440%	75−80 +1440%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −263%	29 +263%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −750%	50−55 +750%
Dota 2	5−6 −1620%	85−90 +1620%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −450%	75−80 +450%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −633%	88 +633%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −652%	150−160 +652%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	0−1	40−45
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −4200%	40−45 +4200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	14−16 −1067%	170−180 +1067%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −2200%	21−24 +2200%
World of Tanks	14−16 −1007%	160−170 +1007%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −5000%	50−55 +5000%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +82.4%	17 −82.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −425%	21−24 +425%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −1117%	70−75 +1117%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −640%	35−40 +640%
Valorant	8−9 −750%	65−70 +750%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −193%	40−45 +193%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −1183%	75−80 +1183%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −193%	40−45 +193%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −1200%	24−27 +1200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Dota 2	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1550%	30−35 +1550%
Fortnite	1−2 −3000%	30−35 +3000%
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	21−24
Valorant	2−3 −1550%	30−35 +1550%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Valorant

100−110

+0%

100−110

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Valorant

100−110

+0%

100−110

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Valorant

100−110

+0%

100−110

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

This is how Qualcomm Adreno 680 and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RX 6550M is 1033% faster in 1080p
RX 6550M is 1100% faster in 1440p

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

in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm Adreno 680 is 82% faster.
in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6550M is 5000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Qualcomm Adreno 680 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
RX 6550M is ahead in 49 tests (83%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.23	25.14
Recency	6 December 2018	4 January 2023
Chip lithography	7 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	7 Watt	80 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 680 has 1042.9% lower power consumption.

RX 6550M, on the other hand, has a 1027.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 680 in performance tests.

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