GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 vs Radeon HD 6550D
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6550D and GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTS 450 Rev. 2 outperforms HD 6550D by a whopping 315% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1167 | 742 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.13 | 2.89 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Sumo | GF116 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 20 June 2011 (14 years ago) | 15 March 2011 (14 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 | 400 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 783 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,170 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 106 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.00 | 25.06 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.48 TFLOPS | 0.6013 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 |
| TMUs | 20 | 32 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 256 KB |
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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 210 mm |
| Width | IGP | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
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 | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 902 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 57.73 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 2.1 |
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 | 20
−300%
| 80−85
+300%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−287%
|
120−130
+287%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−296%
|
95−100
+296%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−293%
|
55−60
+293%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−287%
|
120−130
+287%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−293%
|
55−60
+293%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−287%
|
120−130
+287%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−300%
|
40−45
+300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−293%
|
55−60
+293%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
This is how HD 6550D and GTS 450 Rev. 2 compete in popular games:
- GTS 450 Rev. 2 is 300% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.96 | 3.98 |
| Recency | 20 June 2011 | 15 March 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 106 Watt |
HD 6550D has an age advantage of 3 months, a 25% more advanced lithography process, and 63.1% lower power consumption.
GTS 450 Rev. 2, on the other hand, has a 314.6% higher aggregate performance score.
The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6550D 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.
