AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 vs AMD Radeon RX 6550M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two AMD mobile-class GPUs. In the two shared tests, the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 decisively outperforms the AMD Radeon RX 6550M. The most significant gap appears in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the Pro Vega 64 scores 71,094 against the RX 6550M's 42,536. That represents a 67.1% advantage for the older, larger chip. The Vulkan test narrows the margin somewhat, but the Pro Vega 64 still leads with 74,174 versus 50,867, a 45.8% difference. Across both recorded head-to-head tests, the Pro Vega 64 wins 2, and the RX 6550M wins 0.

The average benchmark score reinforces this pattern. The Pro Vega 64 holds an average score of 72,379 across its three recorded tests (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), while the RX 6550M averages 46,702 across its two tests. That places the Pro Vega 64 in the 91st percentile of all GPUs in the database, whereas the RX 6550M sits in the 85th percentile. The proximity to rival scores further contextualizes these results. The Pro Vega 64's nearest rival is the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, which averages 72,098, a delta of just 0.4%. It also edges out the AMD Radeon RX 6650M (71,768, 0.9% ahead) and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829, 2.2% ahead), while trailing the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition by 1.4%. The RX 6550M, by contrast, sits in a much lower performance tier, with its nearest rival being the Intel Arc A530M (46,614, 0.2% ahead), followed by the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46,601, 0.2% ahead) and the NVIDIA RTX A2000 (46,043, 1.4% behind). The data implies that the Pro Vega 64 competes with high-end desktop-class parts, while the RX 6550M aligns with midrange mobile offerings.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is substantial, reflecting different design philosophies and eras. The Pro Vega 64 is built on the Vega 10 chip using the GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 12,500 million transistors onto a 495 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.3M per mm². The RX 6550M, conversely, uses the Navi 24 chip based on RDNA 2.0, manufactured by TSMC on a 6 nm process. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a much smaller 107 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². The density difference is stark: the newer chip crams nearly twice as many transistors per square millimeter, proof of the process node advantage.

The compute resources diverge sharply. The Pro Vega 64 fields 4,096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The RX 6550M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Pro Vega 64 offers four times the shading units and TMUs, and double the ROPs. However, the RX 6550M introduces 16 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the Pro Vega 64. Neither GPU includes tensor cores. Clock speeds tell a different story: the RX 6550M runs at a 2000 MHz base and 2840 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2560 MHz, while the Pro Vega 64 operates at 1250 MHz base and 1350 MHz boost. The RX 6550M's higher clocks partially compensate for its fewer units, but not enough to close the performance gap in raw compute.

Memory architecture also differs fundamentally. The Pro Vega 64 uses 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The memory clock rates reflect this: the Pro Vega 64's memory runs at 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective), while the RX 6550M's memory runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The Pro Vega 64's massive bus width gives it nearly three times the bandwidth despite slower memory clocks. The Pro Vega 64 also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 6550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), a newer feature set. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6550M supports Vulkan 1.4 versus the Pro Vega 64's Vulkan 1.3.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64, with an average benchmark score of 72,379 compared to the RX 6550M's 46,702. In head-to-head tests, the Pro Vega 64 leads by 67.1% in OpenCL and 45.8% in Vulkan.

Q: Does the RX 6550M have any architectural advantage over the Pro Vega 64?

A: Yes, the RX 6550M features 16 ray tracing cores, which the Pro Vega 64 lacks entirely. It also uses a more advanced 6 nm process from TSMC versus the 14 nm GlobalFoundries node, achieving 50.5M transistors per mm² versus 25.3M.

Q: How do the memory configurations differ?

A: The Pro Vega 64 has 16 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro Vega 64 offers nearly three times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the power consumption figures?

A: The Pro Vega 64 has a TDP of 250 W, while the RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, and both have portable device dependent display outputs.

Q: Which GPU is newer in the database?

A: The RX 6550M, with a release date of January 3, 2023, while the Pro Vega 64 was released on June 26, 2017. The Pro Vega 64 is marked as end-of-life, while the RX 6550M is active.

Q: How does each GPU rank among all GPUs in the database?

A: The Pro Vega 64 is in the 91st percentile, while the RX 6550M is in the 85th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 | AMD Radeon RX 6550M |

|----------------|------------------------|----------------------|

| Process Node | 14 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 12,500 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 495 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.3M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1250 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1350 MHz | 2840 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2560 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 16 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | HBM2 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 2048 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 402.4 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 4096 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 256 | 64 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | N/A | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 86.40 GPixel/s | 90.88 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 345.6 GTexel/s | 181.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 11.06 TFLOPS | 5.816 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1) | 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 250 W | 80 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | June 26, 2017 | January 3, 2023 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion for raw performance: the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 is the stronger GPU in every measured benchmark. Its average score of 72,379 versus 46,702 means it outperforms the RX 6550M by roughly 55% on average. The head-to-head results confirm this, with the Pro Vega 64 leading by 67.1% in OpenCL and 45.8% in Vulkan. The Pro Vega 64 also holds a higher percentile ranking (91st versus 85th) and sits among much faster rivals, including the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal and AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition. For workloads that depend on raw compute, memory bandwidth, or shading throughput, the Pro Vega 64 is the clear choice from the recorded data.

The RX 6550M, however, is not without merit. Its 80 W TDP is dramatically lower than the Pro Vega 64's 250 W, making it a more power-efficient part. It also brings ray tracing support, a newer directx feature set (12 Ultimate), and a more modern 6 nm process. The RX 6550M's higher clock speeds (2840 MHz boost versus 1350 MHz) and higher pixel rate (90.88 GPixel/s versus 86.40 GPixel/s) indicate it excels in specific scenarios, even if its overall compute is lower. For systems where power draw, heat, or physical size are constraints, the RX 6550M is the more practical option. The Pro Vega 64, being end-of-life and designed for different use cases, may not be suitable for all modern systems despite its performance lead.

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64: The data shows this GPU wins in every head-to-head benchmark recorded. It excels in raw compute, with 11.06 TFLOPS FP32 versus 5.816 TFLOPS for the RX 6550M. Its 402.4 GB/s memory bandwidth is nearly triple that of the RX 6550M, making it better suited for memory-intensive tasks like large dataset processing or high-resolution textures. The 16 GB capacity also allows for larger working sets without swapping. Its 4096 shading units and 256 TMUs suggest strong performance in compute-heavy applications such as rendering or scientific simulation. The Pro Vega 64 sits in the 91st percentile, competing with desktop-class GPUs like the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal.

AMD Radeon RX 6550M: Despite losing every benchmark, the RX 6550M wins on efficiency and modern features. Its 80 W TDP is less than a third of the Pro Vega 64's, making it far better suited for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is limited. The 16 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for ray-traced workloads, a capability the Pro Vega 64 completely lacks. The RX 6550M also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, enabling newer graphics APIs and features. Its higher boost clock (2840 MHz) and game clock (2560 MHz) suggest good responsiveness in lightly threaded or latency-sensitive tasks. The 6 nm process and 50.5M transistors per mm² density indicate a more modern, efficient design. The RX 6550M's rivals in the database, such as the Intel Arc A530M and AMD Radeon RX 5600M, are similarly midrange parts, placing it in a different performance class than the Pro Vega 64.