AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti Comparison

# AMD Radeon HD 8750M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti in the only available benchmark, scoring 5970 against 5731 in Geekbench OpenCL — a 4.2% advantage. However, the two cards are closely matched in overall standing, with the AMD sitting at the 34th percentile of all GPUs and the NVIDIA at the 33rd. The AMD wins on architectural efficiency and modern API support, while the NVIDIA counters with superior memory bandwidth and a higher transistor count. For users prioritizing raw compute in OpenCL workloads, the AMD is the pick; for those needing a desktop card with higher pixel and texture throughput, the NVIDIA holds specific advantages.

The Verdict

The data points to a narrow but real victory for the AMD Radeon HD 8750M in compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5970 surpasses the GTX 550 Ti's 5731 by 4.2%, and its nearest rivals (NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982, NVIDIA Quadro K4000M at 5986) are within 0.3% — meaning the AMD sits in a competitive cluster where small margins decide rankings. The GTX 550 Ti, by contrast, trails slightly behind its own nearest rivals, including the AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691) which it beats by 0.7%, and the AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841) which beats it by 1.9%.

For a user choosing strictly on benchmark results, the AMD Radeon HD 8750M is the better compute performer. It also brings modern features: GCN 1.0 architecture, 28 nm process, and Vulkan 1.2.170 support — all absent from the Fermi 2.0-based GTX 550 Ti. The NVIDIA card, however, is not without merit. It delivers higher pixel rate (7.200 GPixel/s vs 6.600 GPixel/s) and texture rate (28.80 GTexel/s vs 19.80 GTexel/s), plus significantly more memory bandwidth (98.50 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s). If the workload favors fill-rate or bandwidth-bound tasks, the GTX 550 Ti could outperform despite its lower OpenCL score.

The verdict: AMD wins the compute crown by a slim margin; NVIDIA wins on memory and fill-rate specs. Neither card is a clear all-around champion, but the AMD's architectural efficiency and API support make it the more future-proof choice.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon HD 8750M uses the Mars chip built on GCN 1.0 architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. It packs 950 million transistors into a 77 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3M per mm². The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti uses the GF116 chip with Fermi 2.0 architecture, also from TSMC but on a 40 nm process. It holds 1,170 million transistors across a 238 mm² die, with a much lower density of 4.9M per mm².

The AMD's newer process node allows it to fit more transistors per area while consuming less power per transistor — though the TDP is not listed for the AMD, the NVIDIA's is 116 W with a 300 W suggested PSU. The AMD also supports PCIe 3.0 x8, while the NVIDIA is limited to PCIe 2.0 x16. In terms of API support, the AMD leads with DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170; the NVIDIA matches DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but has no Vulkan support listed.

Shading units differ markedly: the AMD has 384 shading units, double the NVIDIA's 192. Yet the NVIDIA has more texture mapping units (32 vs 24) and more ROPs (24 vs 8). This divergence explains the benchmark and spec trade-offs: the AMD's higher shader count boosts compute, while the NVIDIA's higher TMU/ROP counts boost fill-rate operations. The AMD's memory is DDR3 at 1800 Mbps effective, while the NVIDIA uses GDDR5 at 4.1 Gbps effective — a major bandwidth gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the AMD Radeon HD 8750M wins decisively. It scores 5970 against the GTX 550 Ti's 5731, a delta of 4.2%. This margin, while not huge, is consistent when placed in context: the AMD's nearest rival, the NVIDIA Quadro K4000, scores 5982 (just 0.2% ahead), and the AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955 (0.3% behind). The AMD is thus in a tight pack where a 4.2% lead over the GTX 550 Ti is meaningful but not dominant.

The GTX 550 Ti's score of 5731 places it near the AMD Radeon HD 8790M (5691, which it beats by 0.7%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670MX (5721, which it beats by 0.2%). However, the AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841) beats the GTX 550 Ti by 1.9%. This suggests the GTX 550 Ti is competitive with mid-range mobile GPUs but falls slightly short of the AMD Radeon HD 8750M's compute performance.

The benchmark data also reveals that the AMD's advantage is not universal. While it wins the OpenCL compute test, the NVIDIA's spec sheet shows higher pixel rate (7.200 vs 6.600 GPixel/s) and texture rate (28.80 vs 19.80 GTexel/s). In a hypothetical fill-rate benchmark, the GTX 550 Ti would likely win. The memory bandwidth difference — 98.50 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s — further suggests the NVIDIA is better suited for bandwidth-intensive tasks like high-resolution textures or anti-aliasing.

Specification Differences

The two cards diverge on nearly every key specification. Here are the differences:

• Process Node: AMD 28 nm vs NVIDIA 40 nm
• Transistors: AMD 950 million vs NVIDIA 1,170 million
• Die Size: AMD 77 mm² vs NVIDIA 238 mm²
• Transistor Density: AMD 12.3M / mm² vs NVIDIA 4.9M / mm²
• Memory Type: AMD DDR3 vs NVIDIA GDDR5
• Memory Clock: AMD 1800 Mbps effective vs NVIDIA 4.1 Gbps effective
• Memory Bus Width: AMD 128 bit vs NVIDIA 192 bit
• Memory Bandwidth: AMD 28.80 GB/s vs NVIDIA 98.50 GB/s
• Shading Units: AMD 384 vs NVIDIA 192
• TMUs: AMD 24 vs NVIDIA 32
• ROPs: AMD 8 vs NVIDIA 24
• Pixel Rate: AMD 6.600 GPixel/s vs NVIDIA 7.200 GPixel/s
• Texture Rate: AMD 19.80 GTexel/s vs NVIDIA 28.80 GTexel/s
• FP32 Performance: AMD 633.6 GFLOPS vs NVIDIA 691.2 GFLOPS
• TDP: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 116 W
• Slot Width: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA Dual-slot
• Power Connectors: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 1x 6-pin
• Suggested PSU: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 300 W
• Bus Interface: AMD PCIe 3.0 x8 vs NVIDIA PCIe 2.0 x16
• Display Outputs: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a
• Dimensions: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 210 mm / 8.3 inches
• DirectX: AMD 12 (11_1) vs NVIDIA 12 (11_0)
• Vulkan: AMD 1.2.170 vs NVIDIA not listed
• Release Date: AMD 2013-02-25 vs NVIDIA 2011-03-14
• Launch MSRP: AMD not listed vs NVIDIA 149 USD

The NVIDIA card is larger, hungrier for power, and older, but it compensates with GDDR5 memory and a wider bus. The AMD is smaller, denser, and newer, with more shaders but less memory bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8750M scores 5970, which is 4.2% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti's 5731.

Q: Does the NVIDIA card offer better memory bandwidth?

A: Yes, the GTX 550 Ti has 98.50 GB/s bandwidth with GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus, while the AMD Radeon HD 8750M has 28.80 GB/s with DDR3 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8750M supports Vulkan 1.2.170. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do their transistor densities compare?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8750M has a density of 12.3M transistors per mm² on a 77 mm² die, while the GTX 550 Ti has 4.9M per mm² on a 238 mm² die.

Q: What is the NVIDIA card's power requirement?

A: The GTX 550 Ti has a TDP of 116 W, requires a 300 W suggested PSU, and uses a 1x 6-pin power connector. The AMD's TDP is not listed.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 8750M has 384 shading units, double the NVIDIA's 192. However, the NVIDIA has more TMUs (32 vs 24) and ROPs (24 vs 8).

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon HD 8750M wins on:

• Compute performance: 5970 OpenCL score vs 5731, a 4.2% lead.
• Shader count: 384 shading units vs 192, favoring compute-heavy workloads.
• API support: Vulkan 1.2.170 and DirectX 12 (11_1) vs no Vulkan and DirectX 12 (11_0).
• Process efficiency: 28 nm node with 12.3M transistors per mm² vs 40 nm with 4.9M per mm².
• Modern connectivity: PCIe 3.0 x8 vs PCIe 2.0 x16.
• Release recency: Released 2013-02-25 vs 2011-03-14.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti wins on:

• Memory bandwidth: 98.50 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s, a 3.4x advantage.
• Memory type: GDDR5 vs DDR3, with a faster effective clock (4.1 Gbps vs 1800 Mbps).
• Fill-rate operations: Pixel rate of 7.200 GPixel/s vs 6.600 GPixel/s; texture rate of 28.80 GTexel/s vs 19.80 GTexel/s.
• Raw FP32: 691.2 GFLOPS vs 633.6 GFLOPS.
• Texture units and ROPs: 32 TMUs and 24 ROPs vs 24 TMUs and 8 ROPs.
• Desktop features: Dual-slot design, 1x 6-pin power, 2x DVI and mini-HDMI outputs, 210 mm length.

In practical terms, the AMD is the better choice for OpenCL compute tasks, modern API compatibility, and power-efficient operation. The NVIDIA is better for bandwidth-hungry rendering, high-resolution textures, and scenarios where fill rate matters more than shader count. The data shows a split decision: AMD for compute and longevity, NVIDIA for bandwidth and rasterization throughput.