AMD Radeon HD 8870M vs AMD Radeon RX 550X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a single direct benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 550X and the AMD Radeon HD 8870M, and it is decisive. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 550X scores 9,662 points against 8,462 points for the HD 8870M. That is a 14.2% advantage for the newer part, and it is the only head-to-head result on file, so the RX 550X takes the sole win in this matchup.

The margin is substantial in raw terms, but the context matters more. The RX 550X lands at the 49th percentile among all GPUs in the database, while the HD 8870M sits at the 43rd percentile. The gap between those percentiles is modest, yet the score delta is clear. The RX 550X's average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 10,481, which is 24% higher than the HD 8870M's 8,462 average. This consistency suggests the OpenCL result is not an outlier but a reflection of the underlying performance difference.

The RX 550X also holds its own against its nearest rivals in a way the HD 8870M does not. The RX 550X is within 1.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (which scores 10,629) and within 1.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (10,362). It actually beats the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (10,400) by 0.8% and trails the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (10,582) by only 1%. This places the RX 550X in a competitive cluster of mobile and low-power GPUs.

The HD 8870M, by contrast, is bracketed by a different set of rivals. It is essentially tied with the NVIDIA GeForce MX330 (8,458, a 0.1% delta) and the AMD Radeon 880M (8,436, a 0.3% delta). It edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427) by 0.4% but falls 1.1% behind the Intel Arc A380 (8,558). This places the HD 8870M at the lower end of the performance spectrum, where small percentage differences separate it from near-equal competitors.

What the numbers show is a generational step, not just a clock speed bump. The RX 550X's 14.2% lead in OpenCL is consistent with its higher average score and its position among rivals that are themselves a tier above the HD 8870M's competition. The HD 8870M was competitive in its era, but the database records it as a 43rd percentile GPU, and the RX 550X sits six percentile points higher.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 9,662 points versus 8,462 points for the AMD Radeon HD 8870M, a 14.2% advantage.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 550X has an average benchmark score of 10,481 across all recorded tests, while the HD 8870M averages 8,462. The RX 550X's average is 24% higher.

Q: Where does each GPU rank among all GPUs?

A: The RX 550X sits at the 49th percentile, while the HD 8870M is at the 43rd percentile, a six-point gap in the database's overall distribution.

Q: What is the closest rival for each GPU?

A: The RX 550X's closest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, which trails by 1.4%. The HD 8870M's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX330, which is ahead by 0.1%.

Q: Does the RX 550X outperform any of its nearest rivals?

A: Yes, it beats the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 by 0.8% and the AMD Radeon RX 6500M by 1.2%, while falling just short of the Radeon R9 M275X and RX 6600S.

Q: What is the HD 8870M's best result against its nearest rivals?

A: It beats the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX by 0.4% and roughly ties the GeForce MX330 and Radeon 880M, but it falls 1.1% behind the Intel Arc A380.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different AMD architectures, and the gap shows in the data. The RX 550X is built on GCN 4.0, while the HD 8870M uses GCN 1.0. That is a three-generation jump within the Graphics Core Next family, and it carries real consequences for feature support and efficiency.

The manufacturing process is the most visible difference. The RX 550X uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the HD 8870M uses a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die sizes tell the story: the RX 550X packs 2,200 million transistors into 103 mm², yielding a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The HD 8870M has 1,500 million transistors spread over 123 mm², for a density of 12.2 million per square millimeter. The RX 550X is denser by a wide margin, which is expected given the smaller process node.

Shader configurations differ in an interesting way. The HD 8870M actually has more shading units (640 versus 512), more texture mapping units (40 versus 32), and the same number of render output units (16). Yet the RX 550X still wins on raw throughput because its clocks are much higher. The RX 550X runs at a 1100 MHz base and 1183 MHz boost, versus 725 MHz base and 775 MHz boost for the HD 8870M. The clock advantage more than compensates for the shader deficit, resulting in 1,211.4 GFLOPS of FP32 compute for the RX 550X versus 992.0 GFLOPS for the HD 8870M.

Memory architecture is similar on paper but different in practice. Both use GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 550X has 4 GB of VRAM versus 2 GB, and its memory runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective). That yields 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth versus 72.00 GB/s, a 33% advantage for the RX 550X.

API support also reflects the architectural gap. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3, while the HD 8870M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The RX 550X also has explicit FP16 support at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the HD 8870M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ on nearly every specification the database records. Here is where they diverge:

• Process node: 14 nm (GlobalFoundries) for the RX 550X, 28 nm (TSMC) for the HD 8870M
• Transistor count: 2,200 million versus 1,500 million
• Die size: 103 mm² versus 123 mm²
• Transistor density: 21.4M per mm² versus 12.2M per mm²
• Base clock: 1100 MHz versus 725 MHz
• Boost clock: 1183 MHz versus 775 MHz
• Memory clock: 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective) versus 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective)
• Memory size: 4 GB versus 2 GB
• Memory bandwidth: 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s
• Shading units: 512 versus 640
• Texture mapping units: 32 versus 40
• Pixel rate: 18.93 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 37.86 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s
• FP32 compute: 1,211.4 GFLOPS versus 992.0 GFLOPS
• FP16 compute: 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) versus not recorded
• Thermal design power: 50 W for the RX 550X, not recorded for the HD 8870M
• Slot width: Dual-slot for the RX 550X, not recorded for the HD 8870M
• Power connectors: None for the RX 550X, not recorded for the HD 8870M
• Suggested PSU: 250 W for the RX 550X, not recorded for the HD 8870M
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 550X, not recorded for the HD 8870M
• DirectX support: 12 (12_0) versus 12 (11_1)
• Vulkan support: 1.3 versus 1.2.170
• Release date: RX 550X launched in December 2018, HD 8870M launched in March 2013

The RX 550X is also a physical card with defined dimensions (145 mm or 5.7 inches in length) and a production status of end-of-life. The HD 8870M has no recorded dimensions, power draw, or display outputs, which is typical for a mobile-only part.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550X wins in every scenario where raw compute throughput matters. Its FP32 output of 1,211.4 GFLOPS is 22% higher than the HD 8870M's 992.0 GFLOPS, and its pixel rate of 18.93 GPixel/s versus 12.40 GPixel/s is a 53% advantage. The texture rate is also higher at 37.86 GTexel/s versus 31.00 GTexel/s. For OpenCL workloads, which the benchmark data directly measures, the RX 550X is the clear choice.

The RX 550X also wins on memory capacity and bandwidth. Its 4 GB frame buffer is double the HD 8870M's 2 GB, which matters for modern workloads that exceed 2 GB of VRAM. The bandwidth advantage of 96.00 GB/s versus 72.00 GB/s means the RX 550X can feed its shaders more effectively, especially at higher resolutions or with larger textures. The PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is narrower than the HD 8870M's x16, but the higher memory bandwidth compensates in most real workloads.

The HD 8870M does have one structural advantage: more shading units (640 versus 512) and more texture units (40 versus 32). In theory, this gives it more parallel execution resources. But the clock speed deficit is too large to overcome. The HD 8870M's 725 MHz base clock is 34% lower than the RX 550X's 1100 MHz, and even its 775 MHz boost falls far short. The result is that the HD 8870M's extra hardware never translates into a performance win.

The HD 8870M's PCIe 3.0 x16 interface is wider than the RX 550X's x8, which could matter for data transfer in some compute scenarios. But the database shows no benchmark where this advantage produces a win. The HD 8870M's best case is being within 0.4% of the GeForce GTX 675MX and roughly tied with the GeForce MX330 and Radeon 880M, all of which are low-tier parts.

For use cases, the RX 550X is the better choice for OpenCL compute, any workload that benefits from FP16 (which the HD 8870M lacks entirely), and any task that needs more than 2 GB of VRAM. The HD 8870M's higher shader count is a curiosity but not a practical benefit given its clock speeds. In the database's recorded data, the RX 550X wins the only head-to-head test and holds a higher average score, higher percentile, and better position among its nearest rivals. The HD 8870M remains competitive only within its own peer group, where it trades places with other legacy mobile GPUs.