Skip to main content

GeForce MX550 GPU Rises Above Ryzen 6000 RDNA 2 APUs

GeForce MX550
GeForce MX550 (Image credit: Nvidia)

Early benchmarks revealed that Nvidia's GeForce MX550 was marginally faster than the integrated Vega graphics inside the Ryzen 5000 (Cezanne) APUs. According to a Weibo (opens in new tab) user's review (via HXL (opens in new tab)), the GeForce MX550 also surpassed AMD's latest RDNA 2-powered Ryzen 6000 (Rembrandt) APUs in gaming.

Although Nvidia has officially announced the GeForce MX550, there is still a lot we don't know about the graphics card. From what we've pieced together, the GeForce MX550 utilizes the TU117 (Turing), silicon that also powers the previous GeForce MX450, and other popular models, such as the GeForce GTX 1650. The GeForce MX550 lacks Tensor and RT cores, as those are only in the TU10x chips, but that helps keep die size down — perfectly sensible for a SKU that's at the bottom of the barrel.

The GeForce MX550 arrives with PCIe 4.0 support and GDDR6 memory. The Turing-powered graphics card could sport 1,024 CUDA cores if the rumors are accurate. The Weibo user tested the 2GB variant, but there have been talks of a 4GB SKU as well. The memory probably clocks in at 12 Gbps across a 64-bit memory interface, which would amount to a memory bandwidth up to 96 GBps.

The reviewer claimed that Nvidia would no longer put a TDP rating on the MX500-series graphics cards. The power consumption for the MX550 35W is reportedly the same as the MX450 25W.

GeForce MX550 Benchmarks (Image credit: 金猪升级包/Weibo)

The reviewer used a mix of eSports and triple-A titles for testing at 1080p (1920 x 1080). He didn't specify which graphics preset he used for the tests, but we suspect low to medium settings. As we know, cooling solutions and other factors contribute to the performance of mobile graphics cards. Since the user didn't reveal the model of the laptops, you should approach the rest results with an open mind.

Cumulatively, the GeForce MX550 delivered up to 98.64% faster performance than an undisclosed Intel Core i5 processor. The Turing-based graphics card also wiped the floor with Radeon 660M (Ryzen 5 6600H), showing 59.63% better performance. 

However, the GeForce MX550 was only 4.45% faster than the Radeon 680M (Ryzen 7 6800H), so it wasn't exactly a blowout. Moreover, the Turing performer didn't outclass the Radeon 680M in every game. For example, the Radeon 680M utterly dominated the GeForce MX550 in League of Legends and Metro Exodus. The latter shows the GeForce MX550's 2GB limitation, but the rumored 4GB variant should solve that problem.

For reference, the Radeon 680M for the SKU, as mentioned earlier, has 12 CUs that boost up to 2,200 MHz. Therefore, given the slight performance difference, a faster Ryzen 6000 chip, such as the Ryzen 9 6900HS or the flagship Ryzen 9 6980HX with the Radeon 680M, clocked up to 2,400 MHz, should match if not surpass the GeForce MX550.

Zhiye Liu
Zhiye Liu

Zhiye Liu is a Freelance News Writer at Tom’s Hardware US. Although he loves everything that’s hardware, he has a soft spot for CPUs, GPUs, and RAM.

  • John_128
    Comparing a discrete GPU to an APU is apples-to-oranges poppycock. What is WRONG with you?
    Reply
  • MartianM
    The maths on the averages is wrong. For the games shown on the chart, the 6800 is 192% faster and the MX550 is only 185% faster. Excluding the two titles with no MX result, the 6800 average increases to 196%. So the premise and title of the article is wrong
    Reply
  • drajitsh
    Exactly what I was think. Of it had dedicated memory that alone would probably make up the difference, and let's not forget about the cost and packaging advantages
    Reply
  • Rdslw
    2GB of VRAM is killing MX550, it seems not bad for 35W, but that 2GB of ram is no-go for a lot of titles.
    what's the point of dedicated GPU when it just dont have ram to run stuff ? I belive that MOST AAA titles will do work like metro did, 65FPS on AMD APU, and ~20 from this dedicated gpu.

    TLDR: dead tech on arival, revival of MX450 which is revival of MX350 which is revival of MX250, and nothing really changed there since 2018, like on intel side 2014-2019.
    Reply
  • jeremyj_83
    If nothing else this shows how powerful the RDNA2 APUs are on the GPU side. You can do some light gaming all while having the excellent power draw enabled by not having a dGPU. I could very easily see myself getting a laptop with an RDNA2 APU in it sometime in the future.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    While this is certainly a win for the APU if taken in a vacuum, it's not going to be pair with such a processor anyway. A cursory glance elsewhere tells me the MX450 was used in laptops with a midrange to lower midrange CPU, which would have a worse performing iGPU in it. So while the comparison is interesting, it's not exactly representative of where the MX 550 is going to end up.
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    jeremyj_83 said:
    If nothing else this shows how powerful the RDNA2 APUs are on the GPU side. You can do some light gaming all while having the excellent power draw enabled by not having a dGPU. I could very easily see myself getting a laptop with an RDNA2 APU in it sometime in the future.
    If you thought RDNA2 inside a APU was good, wait until RDNA3 hits APU's.

    And imagine what DeskTop CPU's will be able to do with 4-6 CU's integrated into it's cIOD with RDNA2 & better GPU architecture.

    Hopefully AMD doesn't gimp GPU performance.
    Reply
  • renz496
    Kamen Rider Blade said:
    If you thought RDNA2 inside a APU was good, wait until RDNA3 hits APU's.

    And imagine what DeskTop CPU's will be able to do with 4-6 CU's integrated into it's cIOD with RDNA2 & better GPU architecture.

    Hopefully AMD doesn't gimp GPU performance.
    AMD will probably going to keep RDNA 2 for quite sometime. Just look how long AMD keep Vega iGPU around. AMD skip RDNA and go straight to RDNA 2. AMD probably going to skip RDNA 3 and updates the iGPU to RDNA4.

    On the performance side rather than AMD gimping the performance the issue most likely being limited by external factor such as bandwidth provided by system RAM.
    Reply
  • Kamen Rider Blade
    renz496 said:
    AMD will probably going to keep RDNA 2 for quite sometime. Just look how long AMD keep Vega iGPU around. AMD skip RDNA and go straight to RDNA 2. AMD probably going to skip RDNA 3 and updates the iGPU to RDNA4.

    On the performance side rather than AMD gimping the performance the issue most likely being limited by external factor such as bandwidth provided by system RAM.
    I still want a single 2 GB GDDR6 RAM Chip & 2GB DDR5 RAM Chip connected directly to the cIOD to act as VRAM & L4 eDRAM respectively.

    Given the nature of a iGPU on the cIOD, a 2GB GDDR6 RAM Chip could really help with the performance of the iGPU.
    Reply