GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and AMD Radeon 860M are both integrated-class graphics solutions aimed at thin and light laptops, but they represent vastly different design philosophies and generations. The MX550 is a discrete, end-of-life Turing-based part from late 2021, while the 860M is an active, RDNA 3.5-based IGP from early 2025. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the MX550 at 26421 and the 860M at 26401, a difference of just 0.1%, placing both at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs. This statistical tie makes the choice less about raw performance and more about which specific workloads and architectural traits matter most to the user.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 scores 26421 on average, which is a mere 0.1% higher than the AMD Radeon 860M’s 26401. The delta between them is negligible, essentially a dead heat in overall synthetic performance.

Q: In which specific benchmark does the AMD Radeon 860M win?

A: The 860M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 22759, beating the MX550’s 20372 by 10.5%. This indicates a significant advantage in compute-heavy, general-purpose GPU workloads.

Q: Where does the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 take the lead?

A: The MX550 wins the Geekbench Vulkan test decisively, scoring 32469 against the 860M’s 30043. That is an 8.1% lead, suggesting better performance in modern graphics APIs and gaming scenarios that leverage Vulkan.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Radeon 860M has a 15 W TDP, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 has a 25 W TDP. The 860M is the more power-efficient option on paper, which could translate to longer battery life in laptops.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in terms of their transistor density?

A: No. The MX550, built on a 12 nm process, has a transistor density of 23.5M / mm². The 860M’s transistor density is unknown because its die size and transistor count are not disclosed, though it is fabricated on a much smaller 4 nm node.

Q: What are their respective production statuses?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is marked as End-of-life, while the AMD Radeon 860M is listed as Active. This means the MX550 is no longer in production, whereas the 860M is a current, actively shipped product.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 uses the Turing architecture with the TU117SB chip, manufactured by TSMC on a 12 nm process. This older node results in a die size of 200 mm² and a transistor count of 4,700 million. In contrast, the AMD Radeon 860M uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture with the Krackan Point chip, fabricated by TSMC on a state-of-the-art 4 nm process. Its die size and transistor count are listed as unknown, highlighting a key difference in available data and design complexity.

The compute configurations also diverge significantly. The MX550 has 1024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The 860M has half the shading units at 512, but it also has 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs, matching the MX550 in those areas. A major architectural difference is the presence of 8 ray tracing cores on the AMD part, a feature entirely absent from the older NVIDIA chip. Neither GPU has tensor cores, and both offer FP32 and FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio.

Clock speeds tell another story of design intent. The MX550 has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1320 MHz. The 860M starts much lower at 600 MHz base but boosts significantly higher to 3000 MHz. This high boost clock, combined with the newer architecture, allows the 860M to reach a peak FP32 throughput of 3.072 TFLOPS, surpassing the MX550’s 2.703 TFLOPS. The 860M also boasts higher theoretical pixel and texture rates: 48.00 GPixel/s and 96.00 GTexel/s, respectively, versus 21.12 GPixel/s and 42.24 GTexel/s for the MX550.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data presents a clear split between two different types of workloads. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon 860M is the clear winner, posting a score of 22759 compared to the MX550’s 20372. This 10.5% advantage for the AMD part suggests that its newer architecture and higher compute throughput are more effective in general-purpose, OpenCL-accelerated tasks like video encoding or productivity applications.

However, the tables turn in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 takes a commanding lead with a score of 32469, while the 860M trails at 30043. This 8.1% margin for the NVIDIA part is significant. Vulkan is a low-overhead graphics API commonly used in modern games, and this result indicates that the MX550, despite its older architecture and lower raw compute specs, is better optimized for this specific gaming workload. The data shows a 1-1 split in wins, with each GPU dominating in one API.

Specification Differences

The most glaring difference is in memory configuration. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 has a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 860M uses System Shared memory, meaning its size, type, and bus width are all dependent on the host system, with bandwidth listed as System Dependent. This is a fundamental design difference: one is a discrete GPU with its own VRAM, the other is an integrated GPU that borrows from system RAM.

Process node and power consumption also differ sharply. The MX550 uses a 12 nm process with a 25 W TDP, while the 860M uses a 4 nm process with a 15 W TDP. The manufacturing process alone explains the efficiency gap. Additionally, the 860M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the MX550 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a feature-level difference that could affect compatibility with the latest graphical effects. Both share the same PCIe 4.0 x8 bus interface, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The 860M’s predecessor is listed as Navi II IGP, while the MX550 has no predecessor listed.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a nuanced picture. For users prioritizing pure compute performance in OpenCL applications, the AMD Radeon 860M is the superior choice, offering a 10.5% performance lead. Its higher FP32 throughput, ray tracing cores, and newer architecture make it a more future-proof and capable part for general GPU compute. Its lower 15 W TDP also makes it a more power-efficient option, which is critical for laptop battery life.

However, for users whose primary concern is gaming performance via the Vulkan API, the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is the winner. Its 8.1% lead in the Vulkan benchmark is substantial and suggests that NVIDIA’s driver optimization and architecture are better suited for this particular workload. The MX550’s dedicated VRAM may also offer advantages in stability and latency compared to a shared memory setup, even if its total bandwidth is lower.

The production status is a critical factor. The MX550 is End-of-life, meaning it is an older product that is no longer being manufactured. The 860M is Active, representing a current generation part. This makes the 860M a more logical choice for a new system build, as it will likely receive ongoing driver support and be available in newer laptops. The verdict is clear: the 860M is the better all-around choice for a new purchase due to its active status, efficiency, and compute strength. The MX550 is only preferable for a very specific use case where Vulkan gaming performance is the absolute priority and the older product is available.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon 860M:

• Compute and Productivity: Wins the OpenCL benchmark by 10.5%, indicating superior performance in non-gaming, general-purpose GPU tasks.
• Power Efficiency: With a 15 W TDP versus 25 W, it is the more power-frugal option, ideal for ultra-portable laptops.
• Modern Feature Set: Supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and includes 8 ray tracing cores, offering hardware features the MX550 lacks.
• Long-term Viability: As an Active product with a 4 nm process, it represents the current generation and is more likely to be found in new, future-proof systems.

NVIDIA GeForce MX550:

• Vulkan Gaming: Wins the Vulkan benchmark by 8.1%, demonstrating a clear advantage in this specific graphics API.
• Dedicated Memory: The 2 GB of GDDR6 is not shared with the system, which can be beneficial for avoiding memory contention in certain tasks.
• Raw Average Performance: Holds a razor-thin 0.1% lead in average benchmark score over the 860M, making it the nominal, if not practical, performance leader in aggregate.