UHD Graphics 750 vs ATI Radeon X1550

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1550 and UHD Graphics 750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1550
2007
256 MB DDR2, 27 Watt
0.17

UHD Graphics 750 outperforms ATI X1550 by a whopping 2453% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1415664
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.4520.71
ArchitectureUltra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameRV516Rocket Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2007 (18 years ago)30 March 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 data256
Core clock speed550 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistors105 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate2.20020.80
Floating-point processing powerno data0.6656 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs416

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16Ring Bus
Width1-slotIGP
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 typeDDR2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MBpsSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/sno data

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.4
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.2

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.

ATI X1550 0.17
UHD Graphics 750 4.34
+2453%

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 X1550 66
UHD Graphics 750 1733
+2526%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
World of Tanks 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.17 4.34
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 750 has a 2452.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 750 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1550 in performance tests.


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.


ATI Radeon X1550
Radeon X1550
Intel UHD Graphics 750
UHD Graphics 750

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.


3.6 47 votes

Rate Radeon X1550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 401 vote

Rate UHD Graphics 750 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.