Radeon RX 6550M vs T600

Place in the ranking	334	220
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	29.04	21.83
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	TU117	Navi 24
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	6 May 2021 (3 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 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 cores	640	1024
Core clock speed	735 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1335 MHz	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	53.40	181.8
Floating-point processing power	1.709 TFLOPS	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	40	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
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 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

4x mini-DisplayPort

Portable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.6	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.2
Vulkan	1.2	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

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.

T600 16.69

RX 6550M 25.09
+50.3%

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.

T600 6484

RX 6550M 9747
+50.3%

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.

T600 8694

RX 6550M 20506
+136%

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.

T600 6552

RX 6550M 14696
+124%

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	53 −28.3%	68 +28.3%
1440p	26 +8.3%	24 −8.3%
4K	21 −42.9%	30−35 +42.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −82.8%	53 +82.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −57.6%	50−55 +57.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −42.6%	75−80 +42.6%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −55.2%	45 +55.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −57.6%	50−55 +57.6%
Forza Horizon 4	65 −89.2%	123 +89.2%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −48.9%	65−70 +48.9%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −43.5%	65−70 +43.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −37.5%	55−60 +37.5%
Valorant	65−70 −50%	100−110 +50%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −42.6%	75−80 +42.6%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 −20.7%	35 +20.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −57.6%	50−55 +57.6%
Dota 2	80 −8.8%	85−90 +8.8%
Far Cry 5	96 +191%	33 −191%
Fortnite	90−95 −38%	120−130 +38%
Forza Horizon 4	51 −98%	101 +98%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −48.9%	65−70 +48.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	59 −47.5%	85−90 +47.5%
Metro Exodus	10 −560%	65−70 +560%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −34.7%	150−160 +34.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −37.5%	55−60 +37.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −59.6%	80−85 +59.6%
Valorant	65−70 −50%	100−110 +50%
World of Tanks	200−210 −23.9%	250−260 +23.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −42.6%	75−80 +42.6%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +0%	29 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −57.6%	50−55 +57.6%
Dota 2	111 +27.6%	85−90 −27.6%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −30.5%	75−80 +30.5%
Forza Horizon 4	45 −95.6%	88 +95.6%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −48.9%	65−70 +48.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −34.7%	150−160 +34.7%
Valorant	65−70 −50%	100−110 +50%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	20−22 −50%	30−33 +50%
Dota 2	27 −59.3%	40−45 +59.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	27 −59.3%	40−45 +59.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −9.6%	120−130 +9.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −53.3%	21−24 +53.3%
World of Tanks	110−120 −43.6%	160−170 +43.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −50%	50−55 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −69.2%	21−24 +69.2%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −72.1%	70−75 +72.1%
Forza Horizon 4	32 −113%	65−70 +113%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −57.7%	40−45 +57.7%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −52.6%	55−60 +52.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −65.2%	35−40 +65.2%
Valorant	40−45 −60.5%	65−70 +60.5%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Dota 2	25 −76%	40−45 +76%
Grand Theft Auto V	25 −76%	40−45 +76%
Metro Exodus	8 −150%	20−22 +150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 −56%	75−80 +56%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −45.5%	16−18 +45.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 −76%	40−45 +76%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −68.8%	27−30 +68.8%
Counter-Strike 2	7−8 −57.1%	10−12 +57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −80%	9−10 +80%
Dota 2	40 −10%	40−45 +10%
Far Cry 5	21−24 −61.9%	30−35 +61.9%
Fortnite	20−22 −60%	30−35 +60%
Forza Horizon 4	18 −117%	35−40 +117%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −61.5%	21−24 +61.5%
Valorant	18−20 −73.7%	30−35 +73.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2

21−24

+0%

21−24

+0%

This is how T600 and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RX 6550M is 28% faster in 1080p
T600 is 8% faster in 1440p
RX 6550M is 43% 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 T600 is 191% faster.
in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6550M is 560% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

T600 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
RX 6550M is ahead in 60 tests (94%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.69	25.09
Recency	6 May 2021	4 January 2023
Chip lithography	12 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	80 Watt

T600 has 100% lower power consumption.

RX 6550M, on the other hand, has a 50.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the T600 in performance tests.

Be aware that T600 is a workstation card while Radeon RX 6550M is a notebook one.