Arc A550M vs Radeon R9 Fury

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
255 OEM 260 OEM 270 270 1024SP 270X 280 280X 280X2 285 290 290X 290X2 295X2 360 OEM 370 370 1024SP 370X 380 380 OEM 380X 390 390 X2 390X 390X2 A375 Fury FURY X FURY X2 Nano
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
A350M A370M A380M A530M A550M A570M A730M A770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 Fury with Arc A550M, including specs and performance data.

R9 Fury
2015, $549
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
22.76
+0.5%

R9 Fury outperforms A550M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
R9 Fury R9 Fury
Arc A550M Arc A550M

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking273276
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.07no data
Power efficiency6.3528.97
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameFijiDG2-512
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date10 July 2015 (10 years ago)2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores35842048
Compute units56no data
Core clock speedno data900 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2050 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate224.0262.4
Floating-point processing power7.168 TFLOPS8.397 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs224128
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data16
L1 Cache896 KB3 MB
L2 Cache2 MB8 MB

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors​2x 8-pinno data
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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)GDDR6
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s224.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.6
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan+1.3
Mantle+-
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

R9 Fury 22.76
+0.5%
Arc A550M 22.64

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 Fury 14580
+1.6%
Arc A550M 14350

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 HD90
+5.9%
85−90
−5.9%
1440p106
+6%
100−110
−6%
4K48
+6.7%
45−50
−6.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.10no data
1440p5.18no data
4K11.44no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0.8%
130−140
−0.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 90−95
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0.8%
130−140
−0.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 110−120
+0.9%
110−120
−0.9%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 90−95
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+0.8%
130−140
−0.8%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 268
+5.9%
250−260
−5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Fortnite 95
−21.1%
110−120
+21.1%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+1.2%
80−85
−1.2%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90−95
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 91
+33.8%
65−70
−33.8%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 90−95
+1.1%
90−95
−1.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Dota 2 130
+8.3%
120−130
−8.3%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50
−80%
90−95
+80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
−47.8%
65−70
+47.8%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 72
−59.7%
110−120
+59.7%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 158
−3.8%
160−170
+3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 200−210
+0.5%
190−200
−0.5%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+2.8%
35−40
−2.8%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 109
+9%
100−105
−9%
Grand Theft Auto V 47
+9.3%
40−45
−9.3%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+5.9%
30−35
−5.9%
Valorant 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 102
+32.5%
75−80
−32.5%
Escape from Tarkov 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20
−20%
24−27
+20%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 25
+0%
24−27
+0%

This is how R9 Fury and Arc A550M compete in popular games:

  • R9 Fury is 6% faster in 1080p
  • R9 Fury is 6% faster in 1440p
  • R9 Fury is 7% faster in 4K

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R9 Fury is 34% faster.
  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Arc A550M is 80% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 Fury performs better in 20 tests (31%)
  • Arc A550M performs better in 6 tests (9%)
  • there's a draw in 38 tests (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 22.76 22.64
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 60 Watt

R9 Fury has a 0.5% higher aggregate performance score.

Arc A550M, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 358.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 Fury and Arc A550M.

Be aware that Radeon R9 Fury is a desktop graphics card while Arc A550M is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

AMD Radeon R9 Fury
Radeon R9 Fury
Intel Arc A550M
Arc A550M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

R9 Fury Radeon R9 Fury
vs
RTX 3050 4 GB GeForce RTX 3050 4 GB
Arc A550M Arc A550M
vs
RTX 3050 6GB Mobile GeForce RTX 3050 6GB Mobile
R9 Fury Radeon R9 Fury
vs
GTX 780 Ti GeForce GTX 780 Ti
GTX 980 Ti GTX 980 Ti
vs
CMP 40HX CMP 40HX
GTX 980 Ti GTX 980 Ti
vs
UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)
GTX 980 Ti GTX 980 Ti
vs
Xbox Series X 6nm GPU Xbox Series X 6nm GPU
GTX 980 Ti GTX 980 Ti
vs
H200 NVL H200 NVL
R9 Fury R9 Fury
vs
RX 7900 XT RX 7900 XT
R9 Fury R9 Fury
vs
RTX 4070 SUPER RTX 4070 SUPER
R9 Nano R9 Nano
vs
GTX 690 GTX 690
R9 Nano R9 Nano
vs
Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB Tesla V100 PCIe 16 GB
R9 Nano R9 Nano
vs
RTX 2070 Super RTX 2070 Super
R9 Nano R9 Nano
vs
RTX 3050 OEM RTX 3050 OEM

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.8 189 votes

Rate Radeon R9 Fury on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 93 votes

Rate Arc A550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 Fury or Arc A550M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.