UHD Graphics vs Radeon HD 6550M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6550M and UHD Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
UHD Graphics outperforms HD 6550M by a whopping 304% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1021 | 614 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 6 |
| Power efficiency | 3.65 | 38.36 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Generation 11.0 (2019−2021) |
| GPU code name | Lexington | Jasper Lake GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 November 2010 (14 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (4 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 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 750 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,154 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 10 nm+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 10 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.00 | 12.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.48 TFLOPS | 0.384 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 20 | 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 | no data |
| Interface | MXM-II | Ring Bus |
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 | DDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
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 | 14
−293%
| 55−60
+293%
|
| Full HD | 19
−295%
| 75−80
+295%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−286%
|
27−30
+286%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−282%
|
130−140
+282%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−279%
|
110−120
+279%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−282%
|
65−70
+282%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−286%
|
27−30
+286%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−282%
|
130−140
+282%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−282%
|
65−70
+282%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−286%
|
27−30
+286%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−282%
|
130−140
+282%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−275%
|
30−33
+275%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−260%
|
18−20
+260%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−300%
|
60−65
+300%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
−286%
|
27−30
+286%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
This is how HD 6550M and UHD Graphics compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics is 293% faster in 900p
- UHD Graphics is 295% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.38 | 5.58 |
| Recency | 26 November 2010 | 11 January 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | 10 Watt |
UHD Graphics has a 304.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.
The UHD Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6550M 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.
