AMD Radeon 880M vs AMD Radeon RX 550X Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 550X is a discrete mobile graphics card built on the GCN 4.0 architecture, using the 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries with the Lexa chip. AMD Radeon 880M is an integrated graphics processor within the Strix Point mobile APU, built on RDNA 3.5 and manufactured on TSMC’s 4 nm node. The database contains two shared benchmark results, both of which favor the 880M. The RX 550X wins zero shared tests, while the 880M wins two. The recorded data shows a substantial performance gap, but the two products serve very different roles, one as a low-power discrete solution for older laptops, the other as a modern integrated GPU with advanced feature support.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550X does not win any of the head-to-head benchmark tests recorded in the database. In both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, the 880M posts higher scores. The RX 550X’s only advantages lie in its form factor and memory configuration. It is a dual-slot card with 4 GB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. That dedicated memory means the RX 550X does not compete with the CPU for system RAM, which can be beneficial in older systems with limited memory capacity. The 880M, by contrast, uses system shared memory, where bandwidth is system dependent. So for a user with a laptop that has slow or insufficient RAM, the RX 550X could offer more predictable memory performance.

The 880M wins in raw compute and graphics throughput. Its shading units number 768, compared to 512 on the RX 550X. Texture mapping units are 48 versus 32, while both have 16 ROPs. The 880M’s boost clock is 2900 MHz, far higher than the RX 550X’s 1183 MHz. Pixel rate for the 880M is 46.40 GPixel/s, more than double the RX 550X’s 18.93 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.454 TFLOPS on the 880M, compared to 1,211.4 GFLOPS on the RX 550X. The 880M also has 12 ray tracing cores, while the RX 550X has none.

The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the RX 550X only reaches DirectX 12 (12_0). Vulkan support is version 1.4 on the 880M and 1.3 on the RX 550X. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The 880M’s architecture, RDNA 3.5, is several generations newer than GCN 4.0. The process node difference is significant: 4 nm versus 14 nm. Transistor density is 145.9M per mm² on the 880M’s chip, versus 21.4M per mm² on the RX 550X. The 880M’s chip contains 34,000 million transistors, compared to 2,200 million on the RX 550X.

In terms of benchmark wins, the 880M is the clear winner in both recorded tests. The RX 550X’s only potential advantage is its dedicated memory and the fact that it is a discrete card, which means it does not rely on the CPU’s memory subsystem. For older games or applications that do not require modern feature sets, the RX 550X might still function, but the data shows it lags severely in all measured compute and graphics workloads.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded benchmark data, the AMD Radeon 880M is the superior product for anyone who needs compute performance, modern API support, or ray tracing capability. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 880M scores 31285, which is 21623 points higher than the RX 550X’s 9662. That is a 69.1% advantage for the 880M. In Geekbench Vulkan, the 880M scores 40006 versus 11299, a 71.8% gap. The 880M also has a higher average benchmark score of 8436, though this includes many additional tests not run on the RX 550X. The RX 550X has an average benchmark score of 10481, but that figure only includes two Geekbench tests, while the 880M’s average includes ten tests, several of which are Passmark scores that are low in absolute terms.

Who should pick the RX 550X? Only a user who requires a discrete card with dedicated VRAM and cannot use an integrated GPU for compatibility reasons. The RX 550X is end-of-life, released in December 2018, while the 880M is active and released in July 2024. The RX 550X uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W, while the 880M has a TDP of 15 W, meaning the 880M is far more power efficient in terms of absolute consumption. The RX 550X requires a 250 W suggested PSU, while the 880M has no suggested PSU because it is an IGP.

The 880M’s percentile rank among all GPUs is 43, while the RX 550X sits at 49. That might seem counterintuitive given the 880M’s higher scores in shared tests, but the 880M’s percentile is dragged down by its low Passmark scores in some tests, such as 31 in DirectX 10 and 32 in DirectX 12. The RX 550X only has Geekbench results, which are relatively strong for its generation. Still, in head-to-head comparisons, the 880M wins decisively. The verdict is unambiguous: for modern workloads, the 880M is the better choice, and the RX 550X is only relevant for legacy systems or specific use cases where dedicated memory is mandatory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct comparisons between the AMD Radeon RX 550X and the AMD Radeon 880M. Both are Geekbench tests, one for OpenCL and one for Vulkan. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 880M scores 31285, while the RX 550X scores 9662. The delta is negative 69.1% from the perspective of the 880M, meaning the 880M is 69.1% ahead. In practical terms, the 880M delivers more than three times the OpenCL compute score. This test is often used to gauge general-purpose GPU compute, such as image processing, physics simulations, or machine learning inference. The 880M’s higher shading unit count and much higher clock speed contribute to this result.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the 880M scores 40006, while the RX 550X scores 11299. The delta is negative 71.8%, meaning the 880M is 71.8% ahead. Vulkan is a low-level graphics API that can expose performance differences more directly than OpenCL. The 880M’s RDNA 3.5 architecture with 12 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support likely explains part of the gap. The RX 550X, based on GCN 4.0, lacks modern geometry processing features and has a much lower boost clock.

The RX 550X’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075, which scores 10400 on average, a 0.8% delta from the RX 550X’s 10481. The AMD Radeon R9 M275X scores 10582, a negative 1% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 10362, a positive 1.2% delta. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S scores 10629, a negative 1.4% delta. These rivals all fall within a narrow range, indicating the RX 550X performs similarly to older mid-range discrete GPUs from around its release period.

The 880M’s nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX, scoring 8427 on average, a 0.1% delta. The NVIDIA GeForce MX330 scores 8458, a negative 0.3% delta. The AMD Radeon HD 8870M scores 8462, a negative 0.3% delta. The AMD Radeon R9 M375X scores 8325, a positive 1.3% delta. These are all older or entry-level GPUs, suggesting the 880M’s average benchmark score is modest when all tests are considered, despite its strong Geekbench numbers. The 880M’s Passmark scores are particularly low, such as 31 in DirectX 10, which pulls its average down.

The head-to-head data shows that the 880M is not just slightly better than the RX 550X; it is vastly superior in compute and Vulkan performance. The RX 550X cannot close the gap in any recorded test. The 880M’s boost clock of 2900 MHz, combined with 768 shading units, delivers more than triple the FP32 throughput. Texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s, a 3.7x difference. Pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s, a 2.45x difference. These ratios align with the benchmark deltas, confirming that the architectural advantages translate directly to real-world performance.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M wins with a score of 31285, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 9662. The 880M is 69.1% ahead.

Q: Does the RX 550X have any dedicated memory?

A: Yes, the RX 550X has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory, so its bandwidth is system dependent.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W, while the 880M has a TDP of 15 W. The RX 550X also lists a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the 880M has no suggested PSU.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing?

A: Only the AMD Radeon 880M has ray tracing cores, with 12 RT cores. The RX 550X has no RT cores and does not support DirectX 12 Ultimate.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 550X has an average benchmark score of 10481, while the 880M has an average of 8436. However, the 880M’s average includes ten tests, several of which are low Passmark scores, while the RX 550X only has two Geekbench tests.

Q: Which card is older?

A: The RX 550X was released on December 15, 2018, and is end-of-life. The 880M was released on July 14, 2024, and is active.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 550X is built on GCN 4.0, using the Lexa chip, which is part of the Polaris generation (RX 500X). The AMD Radeon 880M uses RDNA 3.5, with the Strix Point chip, part of the Navi III IGP generation for Strix Point Mobile. The process node differs substantially: the RX 550X uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries, while the 880M uses 4 nm from TSMC. Transistor count is 2,200 million on the RX 550X versus 34,000 million on the 880M. Die size is 103 mm² for the RX 550X and 233 mm² for the 880M. Transistor density is 21.4M per mm² for the RX 550X and 145.9M per mm² for the 880M.

Shading units are 512 on the RX 550X and 768 on the 880M. Texture mapping units are 32 versus 48. Both have 16 ROPs. The 880M has 12 ray tracing cores, while the RX 550X has none. Neither has tensor cores. The RX 550X has a base clock of 1100 MHz and boost of 1183 MHz, while the 880M has a base of 400 MHz and boost of 2900 MHz. The 880M’s high boost clock compensates for its lower base clock, which is typical for integrated GPUs that idle at low frequencies.

Memory architecture is another major difference. The RX 550X uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The 880M uses system shared memory, with size, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as system dependent. The RX 550X’s memory clock is 1500 MHz or 6 Gbps effective, while the 880M has no dedicated memory clock.

API support differs: the RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 880M’s Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 Ultimate indicate support for newer features like mesh shaders and ray tracing. The RX 550X’s GCN 4.0 architecture is several generations behind.

The RX 550X is a discrete dual-slot card with a length of 145 mm (5.7 inches), while the 880M is an IGP with no dimensions. The RX 550X has display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a, while the 880M’s outputs are portable device dependent. The RX 550X uses PCIe 3.0 x8, while the 880M uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W and requires a 250 W PSU, while the 880M has a TDP of 15 W and no PSU requirement.

The predecessor for the RX 550X is Polaris, and its successor is Vega. The 880M’s predecessor is Navi II IGP, with no successor listed. The RX 550X is end-of-life, while the 880M is active. The 880M’s architecture, RDNA 3.5, is designed for efficiency and modern workloads, while the RX 550X’s GCN 4.0 is an older design that still offers dedicated memory.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Radeon RX 550X and the AMD Radeon 880M, based on the database fields:

• Architecture: GCN 4.0 versus RDNA 3.5
• Chip: Lexa versus Strix Point
• Process node: 14 nm versus 4 nm
• Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus TSMC
• Transistors: 2,200 million versus 34,000 million
• Die size: 103 mm² versus 233 mm²
• Transistor density: 21.4M / mm² versus 145.9M / mm²
• Base clock: 1100 MHz versus 400 MHz
• Boost clock: 1183 MHz versus 2900 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus system shared
• Memory size: 4 GB versus system shared
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus system shared
• Memory bus width: 128 bit versus system shared
• Memory bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s versus system dependent
• Shading units: 512 versus 768
• TMUs: 32 versus 48
• RT cores: none versus 12
• Pixel rate: 18.93 GPixel/s versus 46.40 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 37.86 GTexel/s versus 139.2 GTexel/s
• FP32: 1,211.4 GFLOPS versus 4.454 TFLOPS
• FP16: 1,211.4 GFLOPS versus 4.454 TFLOPS
• TDP: 50 W versus 15 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot versus IGP
• Suggested PSU: 250 W versus none
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x8
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a versus portable device dependent
• DirectX support: 12 (12_0) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2)
• Vulkan support: 1.3 versus 1.4
• Dimensions: 145 mm length versus none
• Production status: End-of-life versus active
• Release date: 2018-12-15 versus 2024-07-14
• Predecessor: Polaris versus Navi II IGP
• Successor: Vega versus none

The ROP count is the same at 16 for both. Both have no tensor cores. Both have no power connectors. Both have no game clock. TDP is the only power-related field where they differ. The 880M’s lower TDP of 15 W, despite much higher performance, reflects the efficiency of the 4 nm process and RDNA 3.5 architecture. The RX 550X’s 50 W TDP is still modest for a discrete GPU, but it requires a 250 W PSU due to system requirements. The 880M, as an IGP, has no such requirement. The bus interface difference, PCIe 3.0 versus PCIe 4.0, affects data transfer rates, but the 880M’s system shared memory means it relies on the CPU’s memory controller, so the bus interface is less critical. The display outputs on the RX 550X are fixed, while the 880M depends on the portable device’s design. The 880M’s release date is over five years later, and its production status is active, while the RX 550X is end-of-life. These specification differences explain the benchmark results: the 880M is a modern, efficient, and far more capable GPU, while the RX 550X is a legacy part with dedicated memory as its only notable advantage.