RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon RX 6550M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6550M with RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RX 6550M
2023
4 GB GDDR6, 80 Watt
24.93

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms RX 6550M by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking216112
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.3423.62
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 24no data
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date4 January 2023 (1 year ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores10243072
Core clock speed2000 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2840 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology6 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt115 Watt (35 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate181.8no data
Floating-point processing power5.816 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs64no data
Ray Tracing Cores16no data

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x4no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2250 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth144.0 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.2no data
Vulkan1.3-

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.

RX 6550M 24.93
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 39.65
+59%

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.

RX 6550M 9605
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 15276
+59%

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.

RX 6550M 20506
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 28910
+41%

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.

RX 6550M 14696
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 21379
+45.5%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

RX 6550M 4546
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile 8095
+78.1%

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 HD74
−48.6%
110−120
+48.6%
1440p23
−52.2%
35−40
+52.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−50%
60−65
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
−57.4%
85−90
+57.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−54.8%
65−70
+54.8%
Battlefield 5 80−85
−50%
120−130
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−50%
75−80
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−50%
60−65
+50%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−51.8%
85−90
+51.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−56.3%
100−105
+56.3%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−52.8%
220−230
+52.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
−53.1%
75−80
+53.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−50.4%
170−180
+50.4%
Metro Exodus 80−85
−54.8%
130−140
+54.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−56.3%
100−105
+56.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
−56.6%
130−140
+56.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−56.9%
160−170
+56.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
−57.4%
85−90
+57.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−54.8%
65−70
+54.8%
Battlefield 5 80−85
−50%
120−130
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−50%
75−80
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−50%
60−65
+50%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−51.8%
85−90
+51.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 60−65
−56.3%
100−105
+56.3%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−52.8%
220−230
+52.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
−53.1%
75−80
+53.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−50.4%
170−180
+50.4%
Metro Exodus 80−85
−54.8%
130−140
+54.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−56.3%
100−105
+56.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
−58.4%
160−170
+58.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−50.9%
80−85
+50.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−56.9%
160−170
+56.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
−57.4%
85−90
+57.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
−54.8%
65−70
+54.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
−50%
75−80
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−50%
60−65
+50%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−51.8%
85−90
+51.8%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−52.8%
220−230
+52.8%
Hitman 3 45−50
−53.1%
75−80
+53.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
−50.4%
170−180
+50.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 88
−47.7%
130−140
+47.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 49
−53.1%
75−80
+53.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
−56.9%
160−170
+56.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
−56.3%
100−105
+56.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
−48.9%
70−75
+48.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
−48.6%
55−60
+48.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
−40%
35−40
+40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
−45.8%
35−40
+45.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
−57.1%
220−230
+57.1%
Hitman 3 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
−50%
75−80
+50%
Metro Exodus 45−50
−52.2%
70−75
+52.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
−50.9%
80−85
+50.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 130−140
−58.3%
220−230
+58.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
−58.5%
65−70
+58.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
−45.8%
35−40
+45.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−57.9%
30−33
+57.9%
Hitman 3 18−20
−57.9%
30−33
+57.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
−58.7%
200−210
+58.7%
Metro Exodus 27−30
−42.9%
40−45
+42.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−53.8%
40−45
+53.8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
−40%
21−24
+40%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−50%
21−24
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
−47.1%
50−55
+47.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
−42.9%
30−33
+42.9%

This is how RX 6550M and RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 49% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is 52% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.93 39.65
Recency 4 January 2023 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 115 Watt

RX 6550M has 43.8% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 59% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 6550M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 6550M is a notebook graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


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

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 RX 6550M
Radeon RX 6550M
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


4 195 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6550M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 19 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.