AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 shows a clear edge for the NVIDIA part in the two shared test categories, though the margins differ sharply. In Geekbench OpenCL, the MX550 scores 20,372 points against the Radeon Pro Vega 16’s 18,268 points, a difference of 11.5 percent. That is a solid but not overwhelming lead, indicating that both GPUs can handle general compute workloads with the NVIDIA chip holding a meaningful advantage.

The gap widens considerably in the Geekbench Vulkan test. The MX550 records 32,469 points, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 manages 21,832 points. That represents a 48.7 percent advantage for the NVIDIA GeForce MX550, a massive swing that points to fundamental differences in how the two architectures handle the Vulkan API. The MX550 nearly doubles the Radeon Pro Vega 16’s output in this particular workload, making the Vulkan result the single largest differentiator in the head-to-head data.

It is notably the Radeon Pro Vega 16 also has a Geekbench Metal result of 29,650 points, a test that the MX550 does not have recorded. This Metal score is higher than the Radeon’s OpenCL and Vulkan numbers, which reflects the AMD part’s positioning in Apple-centric environments. However, because the MX550 lacks a Metal entry, the two GPUs can only be directly compared through OpenCL and Vulkan.

When looking at the average benchmark scores across all recorded tests, the MX550 posts 26,421 points, which places it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 averages 23,250 points, good for the 68th percentile. The MX550’s average sits just 0.1 percent above the AMD Radeon 860M and 0.3 percent above the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 in the nearest rival rankings, while it trails the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary by 0.5 percent and the NVIDIA RTX A4000 by 1 percent. The Radeon Pro Vega 16, meanwhile, sits essentially level with the NVIDIA P106-100 at a 0 percent delta, and it trails the AMD Radeon RX 6600M by 0.1 percent, the AMD Radeon R9 M290X by 0.1 percent, and the AMD Radeon AI PRO R9700 by 0.3 percent.

In the head-to-head tally, the MX550 wins both shared tests, giving it a 2-0 record over the Radeon Pro Vega 16. The OpenCL win is moderate, but the Vulkan win is decisive enough to define the overall comparison. For users whose workloads rely heavily on Vulkan, the MX550 is clearly the stronger option by a wide margin.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 dominates the two benchmarks that both GPUs ran. In OpenCL, it outperforms the Radeon Pro Vega 16 by 11.5 percent, which is a meaningful edge for compute tasks that scale well across shading units. The MX550’s 2.703 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 2.703 TFLOPS of FP16 performance (at a 1:1 ratio) give it a slight raw compute advantage over the Radeon’s 2.437 TFLOPS FP32 and 4.874 TFLOPS FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). The FP16 picture is interesting: the Radeon Pro Vega 16 actually has higher FP16 throughput, which could benefit workloads that use half-precision math, but the recorded benchmarks do not show this translating into a win.

The Vulkan result is where the MX550 runs away with the comparison. A 48.7 percent lead suggests that the Turing architecture’s driver stack and hardware implementation are substantially better suited to Vulkan’s low-level draw and compute model. The Radeon Pro Vega 16, based on the older GCN 5.0 architecture, appears to struggle with Vulkan efficiency relative to the newer NVIDIA design.

The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 does have its own strengths, even if they do not show up in the head-to-head win column. Its Metal score of 29,650 points is its best recorded result, and it exceeds the MX550’s OpenCL score of 20,372. In environments where Metal is the primary API, such as macOS-based workflows, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 would be the better choice based on the available data. The database records no Metal score for the MX550, so there is no direct comparison, but the Radeon’s Metal performance is clearly strong relative to its own OpenCL and Vulkan numbers.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 also offers a much larger memory bus and higher bandwidth, which the data shows through its 4 GB of HBM2 memory on a 1024-bit bus delivering 307.2 GB/s. The MX550 counters with 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus for 96.00 GB/s. These numbers suggest the Radeon could handle memory-intensive workloads more comfortably, though the benchmark results do not include a compute test that isolates memory-bound performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations and design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is built on the Turing architecture with the TU117SB chip, fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Vega 12 chip, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The database does not list transistor count or die size for the AMD part, so no direct density comparison is possible.

The MX550 has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1320 MHz, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 runs at 815 MHz base and 1190 MHz boost. Despite the lower clocks, the Radeon’s wider execution resources help it stay competitive in some metrics. Both GPUs have 1024 shading units, but the Radeon Pro Vega 16 doubles the TMU count at 64 versus 32 and doubles the ROP count at 32 versus 16. This gives the Radeon a higher pixel rate of 38.08 GPixel/s and texture rate of 76.16 GTexel/s, compared to the MX550’s 21.12 GPixel/s and 42.24 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The MX550 uses 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, producing 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth with memory running at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). The Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus, delivering 307.2 GB/s of bandwidth with memory at 1200 MHz (2.4 Gbps effective). The Radeon’s bandwidth advantage is substantial, more than three times that of the MX550, which could matter for certain workloads even though the recorded benchmarks do not capture that advantage directly.

Power consumption differs significantly. The MX550 has a TDP of 25 W, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 draws 75 W. This makes the MX550 far more efficient on paper, though both are classified as integrated graphics packages (IGP) with no dedicated power connectors listed for the MX550. The Radeon Pro Vega 16’s slot width is also listed as IGP, and no power connector details are provided.

The MX550 supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The MX550 has a newer bus interface, which can be relevant for data transfer speeds in systems with newer platforms. Both GPUs support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6, but the MX550 lists Vulkan 1.4 support while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 lists Vulkan 1.3. The MX550 also has no ray tracing or tensor cores listed, and neither does the Radeon Pro Vega 16. The Radeon’s FP16 throughput is listed at 4.874 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, meaning it can process half-precision at twice the rate of FP32, whereas the MX550’s FP16 is 2.703 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio.

The MX550 was released on December 16, 2021, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 came out on November 13, 2018, a gap of roughly three years. Both are end-of-life products with no launch MSRP recorded in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 as the stronger GPU in the two shared benchmarks. It wins OpenCL by 11.5 percent and Vulkan by 48.7 percent, giving it a 2-0 head-to-head record. Its average benchmark score of 26,421 points places it in the 72nd percentile, four points above the Radeon Pro Vega 16’s 68th percentile and 23,250 average. The MX550 also maintains a high position among its nearest rivals, sitting within 1 percent of the AMD Radeon 860M, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060, AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary, and NVIDIA RTX A4000.

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 should not be dismissed entirely. Its Metal score of 29,650 points is its strongest recorded result, and in macOS or Metal-centric workflows, this could make it the preferable choice despite losing the OpenCL and Vulkan comparisons. Its 4 GB of HBM2 memory and 307.2 GB/s bandwidth also give it a hardware capability that the MX550 cannot match, even if the benchmarks do not reflect a win in memory-heavy scenarios.

For users prioritizing Vulkan performance, the MX550 is the clear choice. For users in Apple ecosystems where Metal is the standard API, the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a defensible position based on its Metal output. For general compute and cross-platform workloads, the MX550’s higher average score and superior OpenCL and Vulkan results make it the safer pick.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 scores 20,372 points in Geekbench OpenCL, beating the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16’s 18,268 points by 11.5 percent.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The MX550 scores 32,469 points in Geekbench Vulkan, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 scores 21,832 points, a 48.7 percent advantage for the NVIDIA GPU.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 16 have any benchmark where it performs better?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a Geekbench Metal score of 29,650 points, which is higher than its OpenCL and Vulkan scores. The MX550 has no Metal score recorded, so no direct comparison is available.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for both GPUs?

A: The MX550 averages 26,421 points across all recorded tests, placing it in the 72nd percentile. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 averages 23,250 points, placing it in the 68th percentile.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus with 307.2 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher power draw?

A: The Radeon Pro Vega 16 has a TDP of 75 W, while the MX550 has a TDP of 25 W.