GeForce MX550 vs ATI Radeon VE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1598467
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data32.90
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRage 6TU117S
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date19 February 2001 (24 years ago)17 December 2021 (3 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 coresno data1024
Core clock speed183 MHz1065 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1320 MHz
Number of transistors30 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate0.5542.24
Floating-point processing powerno data2.703 TFLOPS
ROPs116
TMUs332
L1 Cacheno data2 MB
L2 Cacheno data2 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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 MB2 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed183 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.928 GB/s96 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX7.012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.7 (6.4)
OpenGL1.34.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

ATI VE 2
Samples: 1
GeForce MX550 4483
+224050%
Samples: 678

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 HDno data46
4Kno data28

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 47
+0%
47
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 111
+0%
111
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55
+0%
55
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 104
+0%
104
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
+0%
27
+0%
Valorant 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 19 February 2001 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 32 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 180 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 25 Watt

ATI VE has 8.7% lower power consumption.

GeForce MX550, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 20 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon VE and GeForce MX550. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon VE is a desktop graphics card while GeForce MX550 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.


ATI Radeon VE
Radeon VE
NVIDIA GeForce MX550
GeForce MX550

Other comparisons

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.


2 1 vote

Rate Radeon VE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 901 votes

Rate GeForce MX550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon VE or GeForce MX550, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.