GPU Comparison

Intel HD Graphics 530 is an integrated graphics solution from Intel, built on the Generation 9.0 architecture with a Skylake GT2 chip, while the AMD Radeon 550 is a dedicated graphics card from AMD, built on the GCN 4.0 architecture with a Lexa chip. The benchmark data shows a decisive performance gap between the two, with the AMD Radeon 550 winning both head-to-head tests by substantial margins, though the Intel HD Graphics 530 holds a slightly higher percentile ranking among all GPUs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the data is the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD Radeon 550 delivers a score of 11257 compared to the Intel HD Graphics 530’s 1422. This represents a deltaPct of -87.4, meaning the Intel part trails by a massive 87.4% in this API workload. The AMD card’s advantage here is not incremental; it is a generational gap that places the Radeon 550 in a completely different performance tier. For applications leveraging Vulkan, the Intel HD Graphics 530 would struggle to maintain playable frame rates in modern titles, while the Radeon 550 provides a usable baseline.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon 550 again wins decisively, scoring 10339 against the Intel HD Graphics 530’s 3550. The deltaPct of -65.7 shows the Intel part trails by 65.7% in this compute-oriented benchmark. This test is particularly relevant for general-purpose GPU workloads, and the data indicates the Radeon 550 is roughly three times faster in raw compute throughput. The Intel HD Graphics 530’s score of 3550 places it near its average benchmark score of 3332, while the Radeon 550’s OpenCL result is significantly above its own average of 2801, suggesting the OpenCL test is a strong showcase for the AMD architecture.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the AMD Radeon 550 also has results in PassMark tests that the Intel HD Graphics 530 lacks entirely. The Radeon 550 scores 2124 in PassMark G3D, 936 in GPU Compute, and 479 in G2D. While these are not head-to-head comparisons, they provide context for the Radeon 550’s overall capabilities. The Intel HD Graphics 530’s only additional benchmark is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 5025, though no equivalent Metal score exists for the Radeon 550, making direct comparison impossible for that API.

The wins ledger confirms the direction: the AMD Radeon 550 wins 2 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 wins 0. This is not a close contest. The average benchmark scores reinforce the picture, with the Intel HD Graphics 530 averaging 3332 and the AMD Radeon 550 averaging 2801, but this average is skewed by the Radeon 550’s multiple low PassMark scores. In the two tests where both parts have data, the AMD card is overwhelmingly faster.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 550 is the superior performer for any task that relies on Vulkan or OpenCL APIs. The 87.4% lead in Vulkan and the 65.7% lead in OpenCL are not marginal differences; they represent a fundamental performance class difference. Users who need a discrete GPU for gaming, compute workloads, or hardware acceleration should choose the AMD Radeon 550 without hesitation. The Intel HD Graphics 530, being an integrated solution with system-shared memory, simply cannot match the dedicated memory bandwidth and shading resources of the Radeon 550.

However, the Intel HD Graphics 530 has its own niche. Its percentile of 20 versus the Radeon 550’s 18 indicates that, across all GPUs in the database, the Intel part is actually ranked slightly higher. This is counterintuitive given the head-to-head results, but it reflects that the Intel HD Graphics 530’s scores are more consistent across the benchmarks it participates in, whereas the Radeon 550’s average is dragged down by its low PassMark DirectX scores (7 in DX10, 15 in DX11, 14 in DX12, 35 in DX9). These sub-100 scores are anomalous and suggest potential driver or compatibility issues on those legacy APIs for the Radeon 550.

For a user building a low-power system where a discrete GPU is not an option, the Intel HD Graphics 530 is the only choice, and its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for ultraportable designs. For anyone seeking actual gaming or compute performance, the AMD Radeon 550’s 50 W TDP and dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory make it the clear winner. The verdict is simple: pick the Radeon 550 for performance, pick the Intel HD Graphics 530 only if you require an integrated solution and have no expansion slot.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built into the Skylake GT2 chip, manufactured by Intel on a 14 nm+ process node. It has a die size of 123 mm² and uses a Ring Bus interface. The AMD Radeon 550 is a discrete card built on the Lexa chip, manufactured by GlobalFoundries on a 14 nm process node, with a die size of 103 mm² and a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The Radeon 550’s die is smaller despite housing significantly more hardware, thanks to its higher transistor density of 21.4M per mm², totaling 2,200 million transistors; the Intel part does not list a transistor count or density.

The compute resources differ drastically. The Intel HD Graphics 530 has 192 shading units, 24 texture mapping units (TMUs), and only 3 raster output units (ROPs). The AMD Radeon 550 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This 2.7x advantage in shading units and 5.3x advantage in ROPs explains the massive performance delta. The memory architecture is another key divider: the Intel part uses system-shared memory with a system-dependent bandwidth, while the Radeon 550 uses 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 56.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Clock speeds also favor the AMD card. The Intel HD Graphics 530 has a base clock of 350 MHz and a boost clock of 950 MHz, while the Radeon 550 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1183 MHz, with memory clocked at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The Intel part’s pixel rate is 2.850 GPixel/s and texture rate is 22.80 GTexel/s, while the Radeon 550 achieves 18.93 GPixel/s and 37.86 GTexel/s, respectively. In floating-point performance, the Radeon 550 delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS in both FP32 and FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the Intel part delivers 364.8 GFLOPS FP32 and 729.6 GFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The AMD Radeon 550 delivers 1,211.4 GFLOPS FP32, which is more than three times the Intel HD Graphics 530’s 364.8 GFLOPS.

Q: How do the two compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The AMD Radeon 550 scores 11257 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 scores 1422, giving the AMD card an 87.4% lead.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the AMD Radeon 550 has 2 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 64-bit bus with 56.00 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 ranks at the 20th percentile, while the AMD Radeon 550 ranks at the 18th percentile, meaning the Intel part is slightly higher despite losing both head-to-head tests.

Q: What are the TDP requirements for each?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 has a TDP of 15 W and is an IGP, while the AMD Radeon 550 has a TDP of 50 W and requires a suggested PSU of 250 W.

Q: Which GPU supports DirectX 12 with a higher feature level?

A: The Intel HD Graphics 530 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the AMD Radeon 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), so the Intel part has a slightly higher feature level.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 550 wins decisively in every head-to-head benchmark available. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 10339 versus 3550, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 11257 versus 1422. These are the two tests where both parts have data, and the Radeon 550 dominates both. Additionally, the Radeon 550 has PassMark results that the Intel part does not have, including a G3D score of 2124 and a GPU Compute score of 936, which further demonstrate its capability in DirectX and compute workloads. The Radeon 550 also has a massive advantage in pixel rate (18.93 GPixel/s vs 2.850 GPixel/s) and texture rate (37.86 GTexel/s vs 22.80 GTexel/s), making it the clear winner for any graphics-intensive application.

The Intel HD Graphics 530’s wins are more subtle. It has a higher percentile ranking (20th vs 18th) and a higher average benchmark score (3332 vs 2801), driven by its consistent performance across Geekbench tests without the low PassMark outliers that plague the Radeon 550. The Intel part also has a higher DirectX feature level (12_1 vs 12_0) and a smaller die size relative to its transistor count, though it uses more die area overall (123 mm² vs 103 mm²). For users constrained to integrated graphics, the Intel HD Graphics 530 is the only option, and its 15 W TDP is far lower than the Radeon 550’s 50 W.

Specification Differences

The two parts differ in nearly every specification category. The Intel HD Graphics 530 is built on a 14 nm+ process by Intel, while the AMD Radeon 550 uses a 14 nm process by GlobalFoundries. The Intel chip is Skylake GT2 with a die size of 123 mm², while the AMD chip is Lexa with a die size of 103 mm² and 2,200 million transistors. The Intel part has 192 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 3 ROPs, while the AMD part has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Clock speeds differ, with the Intel part at 350 MHz base / 950 MHz boost and the AMD part at 1100 MHz base / 1183 MHz boost. Memory is system-shared for Intel and 2 GB GDDR5 for AMD, with the AMD part offering 56.00 GB/s bandwidth. The TDP is 15 W for Intel and 50 W for AMD, with the AMD card requiring a 250 W suggested PSU and a dual-slot form factor, while the Intel part is an IGP with a Ring Bus interface. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for Intel, while the AMD card has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Intel part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and the AMD part supports DirectX 12 (12_0), though both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.3. The AMD Radeon 550 has a launch MSRP of 79 USD, while the Intel HD Graphics 530 has no listed MSRP.