Radeon RX 6550M vs ATI HD 5770

Place in the ranking	671	221
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.87	no data
Power efficiency	2.82	21.67
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Juniper	Navi 24
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	13 October 2009 (15 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores	800	1024
Core clock speed	850 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	1,040 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	108 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	34.00	181.8
Floating-point processing power	1.36 TFLOPS	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	40	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	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	208 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	4800 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	76.8 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	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	Portable Device Dependent
HDMI	+	-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.0	6.7
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	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.

ATI HD 5770 4.32

RX 6550M 24.55
+468%

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.

ATI HD 5770 1705

RX 6550M 9692
+468%

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.

ATI HD 5770 2410

RX 6550M 20506
+751%

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:

900p	24 −442%	130−140 +442%
Full HD	49 −38.8%	68 +38.8%
1440p	4−5 −500%	24 +500%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.24	no data
1440p	39.75	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −308%	53 +308%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −410%	50−55 +410%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −492%	75−80 +492%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −246%	45 +246%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −410%	50−55 +410%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −547%	123 +547%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 −738%	65−70 +738%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −560%	65−70 +560%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
Valorant	10−12 −818%	100−110 +818%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −492%	75−80 +492%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −169%	35 +169%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −410%	50−55 +410%
Dota 2	14−16 −521%	85−90 +521%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −43.5%	33 +43.5%
Fortnite	24−27 −385%	120−130 +385%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −432%	101 +432%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 −738%	65−70 +738%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −514%	85−90 +514%
Metro Exodus	10−11 −560%	65−70 +560%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −316%	150−160 +316%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −293%	55−60 +293%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −447%	80−85 +447%
Valorant	10−12 −818%	100−110 +818%
World of Tanks	70−75 −249%	250−260 +249%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 −492%	75−80 +492%
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 −123%	29 +123%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11 −410%	50−55 +410%
Dota 2	14−16 −521%	85−90 +521%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −230%	75−80 +230%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 −363%	88 +363%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 −738%	65−70 +738%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 −316%	150−160 +316%
Valorant	10−12 −818%	100−110 +818%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	4−5 −950%	40−45 +950%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 −975%	40−45 +975%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 −503%	170−180 +503%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −667%	21−24 +667%
World of Tanks	30−35 −422%	160−170 +422%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 −750%	50−55 +750%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −640%	70−75 +640%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −1017%	65−70 +1017%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −2750%	55−60 +2750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8 −443%	35−40 +443%
Valorant	12−14 −423%	65−70 +423%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −492%	75−80 +492%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −433%	16−18 +433%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −550%	24−27 +550%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −350%	9−10 +350%
Dota 2	16−18 −175%	40−45 +175%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −560%	30−35 +560%
Fortnite	3−4 −933%	30−35 +933%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −1200%	35−40 +1200%
Forza Horizon 5	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Valorant	4−5 −725%	30−35 +725%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2

10−12

+0%

10−12

+0%

This is how ATI HD 5770 and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RX 6550M is 442% faster in 900p
RX 6550M is 39% faster in 1080p
RX 6550M is 500% faster in 1440p

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6550M is 2750% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 6550M is ahead in 60 tests (95%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (5%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	4.32	24.55
Recency	13 October 2009	4 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	108 Watt	80 Watt

RX 6550M has a 468.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 35% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 5770 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 5770 is a desktop card while Radeon RX 6550M is a notebook one.

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