Radeon RX 6550M vs R9 380

Place in the ranking	345	220
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.09	no data
Power efficiency	5.76	21.71
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Antigua	Navi 24
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	18 June 2015 (9 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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	1792	1024
Compute units	28	no data
Core clock speed	no data	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	970 MHz	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	190 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	108.6	181.8
Floating-point processing power	3.476 TFLOPS	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	112	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
Bus support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Length	221 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Form factor	full height / full length / dual slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2 x 6-pin	None
Bridgeless CrossFire	+	-

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
High bandwidth memory (HBM)	-	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	970 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	182.4 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
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no data
HDMI	+	-
DisplayPort support	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire	+	-
FRTC	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
LiquidVR	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
VCE	+	-
DDMA audio	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
Mantle	+	-

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.

R9 380 15.69

RX 6550M 24.90
+58.7%

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.

R9 380 6108

RX 6550M 9692
+58.7%

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.

R9 380 12191

RX 6550M 20506
+68.2%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R9 380 8218

RX 6550M 14696
+78.8%

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	65 −9.2%	71 +9.2%
1440p	14−16 −71.4%	24 +71.4%
4K	27 −48.1%	40−45 +48.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.06	no data
1440p	14.21	no data
4K	7.37	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −96.3%	53 +96.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −64.5%	50−55 +64.5%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −51%	75−80 +51%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −70.4%	46 +70.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −64.5%	50−55 +64.5%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −89.2%	123 +89.2%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −59.5%	65−70 +59.5%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −53.5%	65−70 +53.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −44.7%	55−60 +44.7%
Valorant	60−65 −57.8%	100−110 +57.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −51%	75−80 +51%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −29.6%	35 +29.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −64.5%	50−55 +64.5%
Dota 2	55−60 −52.6%	85−90 +52.6%
Far Cry 5	55−60 +72.7%	33 −72.7%
Fortnite	85−90 −43.2%	120−130 +43.2%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −55.4%	101 +55.4%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −59.5%	65−70 +59.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 −50.9%	85−90 +50.9%
Metro Exodus	40−45 −53.5%	65−70 +53.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −39.8%	150−160 +39.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40 −44.7%	55−60 +44.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	52 −57.7%	80−85 +57.7%
Valorant	60−65 −57.8%	100−110 +57.8%
World of Tanks	200−210 −28.4%	250−260 +28.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −51%	75−80 +51%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −7.4%	29 +7.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −64.5%	50−55 +64.5%
Dota 2	55−60 −52.6%	85−90 +52.6%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −35.1%	75−80 +35.1%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −35.4%	88 +35.4%
Forza Horizon 5	40−45 −59.5%	65−70 +59.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −39.8%	150−160 +39.8%
Valorant	60−65 −57.8%	100−110 +57.8%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	24−27 −75%	40−45 +75%
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27 −79.2%	40−45 +79.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 −16.7%	170−180 +16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −64.3%	21−24 +64.3%
World of Tanks	110−120 −50.9%	160−170 +50.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −59.4%	50−55 +59.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −75%	21−24 +75%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −89.7%	70−75 +89.7%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 −67.5%	65−70 +67.5%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −62.9%	55−60 +62.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −76.2%	35−40 +76.2%
Valorant	40−45 −70%	65−70 +70%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Dota 2	27−30 −63%	40−45 +63%
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30 −63%	40−45 +63%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −72.7%	18−20 +72.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50 −63.8%	75−80 +63.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11 −60%	16−18 +60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −63%	40−45 +63%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16 −73.3%	24−27 +73.3%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
Dota 2	27−30 −63%	40−45 +63%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −65%	30−35 +65%
Fortnite	18−20 −72.2%	30−35 +72.2%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −69.6%	35−40 +69.6%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −75%	21−24 +75%
Valorant	18−20 −83.3%	30−35 +83.3%

This is how R9 380 and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RX 6550M is 9% faster in 1080p
RX 6550M is 71% faster in 1440p
RX 6550M is 48% faster in 4K

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

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 380 is 73% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6550M is 96% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R9 380 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
RX 6550M is ahead in 62 tests (98%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	15.69	24.90
Recency	18 June 2015	4 January 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	190 Watt	80 Watt

RX 6550M has a 58.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 137.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 380 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 380 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.