AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a single direct comparison between these two GPUs in the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the AMD Radeon RX 550 comes out ahead. The RX 550 scores 11063 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A scores 10273 points. That is a 7.7% advantage for the AMD part, a clear but not overwhelming margin. The RX 550 wins the only head-to-head benchmark available in the database.

Looking at overall average benchmark scores, the RX 550 also holds the edge. Its average score across all recorded tests is 11075, compared to 10273 for the GTX 950A. That works out to roughly a 7.8% lead for the RX 550 in aggregate performance. The GTX 950A has only one benchmark result recorded, which limits the depth of comparison, but the data that exists consistently favors AMD.

Placing the RX 550 in the broader GPU landscape, its average score of 11075 puts it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q, both with an average score of 11088, which is only 0.1% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER scores 11047, 0.3% lower than the RX 550. The AMD FirePro W4300 scores 11225, 1.3% higher. These deltas show the RX 550 sitting in a tightly contested performance band where small differences separate adjacent products.

For the GTX 950A, the 48th percentile ranking places it just below the RX 550. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6500M at 10362 (0.9% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 at 10400 (1.2% higher), the AMD Radeon R9 M375 at 10070 (2.0% lower), and the AMD Radeon RX 550X at 10481 (2.0% higher). The GTX 950A sits within a similar cluster, but its absolute scores trail the RX 550 across the board.

The RX 550 also shows versatility through additional benchmark results that the GTX 950A lacks. In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the RX 550 scores 127. In Geekbench Metal, it scores 20838. In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 12270. These results indicate that the RX 550 has been tested across multiple API workloads, while the GTX 950A has only the OpenCL result. The OpenCL head-to-head remains the only direct apples-to-apples comparison, and AMD wins it.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and different architectural generations. The AMD Radeon RX 550 uses the Lexa chip built on GCN 4.0 architecture, belonging to the Polaris (RX 500) generation. It is fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A uses the GM107 chip built on Maxwell architecture, part of the GeForce 900A generation, and is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference is substantial, with AMD using a much smaller transistor geometry.

Transistor counts differ as well. The RX 550 packs 2,200 million transistors onto a 103 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The GTX 950A has 1,870 million transistors on a larger 148 mm² die, giving it a density of only 12.6 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip achieves higher density due to the more advanced process node.

The memory subsystems are significantly different. The RX 550 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 950A also has 2 GB of memory and a 128-bit bus, but it uses DDR3 memory, which limits bandwidth to just 32.03 GB/s. The RX 550 has more than 3.5 times the memory bandwidth of the GTX 950A, a decisive architectural advantage.

Core configurations differ in an interesting way. The GTX 950A has more shading units (640 versus 512), more texture mapping units (40 versus 32), and the same number of render output units (16). Despite having fewer cores, the RX 550 achieves a higher pixel rate at 18.93 GPixel/s versus 17.98 GPixel/s for the GTX 950A. The texture rate goes the other way: the GTX 950A produces 44.96 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s for the RX 550. Raw FP32 compute also favors NVIDIA, with the GTX 950A delivering 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS for the RX 550.

Clock speeds favor AMD. The RX 550 has a base clock of 1100 MHz and a boost clock of 1183 MHz. The GTX 950A runs at 993 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost. The RX 550 also runs its memory at 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective), while the GTX 950A memory runs at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The higher clocks on the RX 550 partially compensate for its lower core count.

API support shows a notable split. The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 950A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 550 has a higher DirectX feature level, while the GTX 950A has a newer Vulkan version. The RX 550 also supports FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, while the GTX 950A has no recorded FP16 capability.

Power and physical design differ substantially. The RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W, a dual-slot design, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. It uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface and measures 145 mm (5.7 inches) in length. The GTX 950A has a TDP of 75 W, comes as an MXM Module, has no power connectors, and uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. Its display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning it is designed for laptops or compact systems rather than desktop expansion slots.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550 wins in several key areas based on the recorded data. Its 7.7% lead in the OpenCL head-to-head is the direct performance win. The RX 550 also delivers far superior memory bandwidth at 112.0 GB/s versus 32.03 GB/s, which is critical for texture-heavy workloads and higher resolutions. Its newer 14 nm process node and GCN 4.0 architecture provide better transistor density at 21.4M per mm² versus 12.6M per mm². The RX 550 also supports a wider range of benchmark APIs, with recorded scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, Geekbench Metal, Geekbench OpenCL, and Geekbench Vulkan. The GTX 950A only has a Geekbench OpenCL result. The RX 550 also has a lower TDP at 50 W versus 75 W, making it more power-efficient on paper.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A wins in raw compute specifications. It has more shading units (640 versus 512), more TMUs (40 versus 32), and higher FP32 performance at 1,438.7 GFLOPS versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS. Its texture rate of 44.96 GTexel/s exceeds the RX 550's 37.86 GTexel/s. The GTX 950A also supports Vulkan 1.4, a newer version than the RX 550's Vulkan 1.3. These advantages in theoretical throughput do not translate into a win in the actual OpenCL benchmark, however, which indicates that the RX 550's architectural efficiencies and memory bandwidth overcome the core count deficit.

The RX 550 has a clear advantage in display outputs, offering 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The GTX 950A's display outputs are portable device dependent, meaning it relies on the host system for display connectivity. The RX 550 also has a defined physical footprint at 145 mm, while the GTX 950A has no recorded dimensions. For systems with a standard PCIe slot, the RX 550 is the straightforward choice. For MXM-based portable systems, the GTX 950A is the applicable option.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the direct benchmark comparison?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 scores 11063 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A scores 10273. The RX 550 wins by 7.7%.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 550 has an average benchmark score of 11075, while the GTX 950A has an average score of 10273. The RX 550 leads by roughly 7.8%.

Q: What memory types do these cards use?

A: The RX 550 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with a 128-bit bus and 112.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 950A uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory with a 128-bit bus and 32.03 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 950A has 640 shading units, while the RX 550 has 512. Despite this, the RX 550 wins the OpenCL benchmark.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RX 550 has a TDP of 50 W and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 950A has a TDP of 75 W and no suggested PSU listed.

Q: Which GPU supports newer APIs?

A: The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 950A supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 550 has a higher DirectX feature level, while the GTX 950A has a newer Vulkan version.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 550 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A |

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

| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 2,200 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 103 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 21.4M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1100 MHz | 993 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1183 MHz | 1124 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (7 Gbps effective) | 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.0 GB/s | 32.03 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 512 | 640 |

| TMUs | 32 | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.93 GPixel/s | 17.98 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 37.86 GTexel/s | 44.96 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,211.4 GFLOPS | 1,438.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1) | Not listed |

| TDP | 50 W | 75 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | MXM-B (3.0) |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2017-04-19 | 2015-03-12 |

| Launch MSRP | 79 USD | Not listed |

The Verdict

The data clearly favors the AMD Radeon RX 550 for general desktop use. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison, has a higher average score, offers dramatically more memory bandwidth, runs on a more efficient 14 nm process, consumes less power at 50 W versus 75 W, and includes standard display outputs. Its launch MSRP was 79 USD, which was recorded at introduction. For a desktop system with a PCIe 3.0 x8 slot, the RX 550 is the stronger performer based on every measurable result in the database.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A is a different class of product. With its MXM-B (3.0) interface and portable device dependent outputs, it is designed for mobile or proprietary systems rather than standard desktop builds. It does offer higher theoretical compute in FP32 and texture rate, and it supports Vulkan 1.4, but those specifications do not translate into a benchmark win. The GTX 950A also uses slower DDR3 memory, which likely explains its lower OpenCL score despite having more cores.

For users with a desktop platform, the RX 550 is the only sensible choice from this comparison. For users with an MXM-based portable system that requires a GTX 950A form factor, the RX 550 is not a drop-in replacement due to the different bus interface. The RX 550 also has more recorded benchmark results, giving it a broader validation profile. The GTX 950A's single OpenCL score limits confidence in its overall capabilities, but the data that exists places it behind the RX 550. The percentile rankings reinforce this: RX 550 sits at the 50th percentile, GTX 950A at the 48th. The RX 550 is the better GPU according to the database.