AMD Radeon RX 550 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data splits the two cards evenly, with each winning two of the four tests. The margins, however, are far from symmetrical. The most dramatic result appears in Geekbench Metal, where the AMD Radeon RX 550 posts a score of 20,838 against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960's 8,773. That is a 137.5% advantage for the RX 550, the largest delta in either direction across the entire comparison. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 550 again takes the lead, scoring 12,270 versus 9,231, a 32.9% edge. These two wins suggest the AMD card holds a clear advantage in compute-oriented API workloads, particularly those that map closely to its architecture's strengths.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 answers with a decisive win in Geekbench OpenCL. Its score of 18,925 dwarfs the RX 550's 11,063, a 41.5% deficit for the AMD part. The GTX 960 also wins the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, scoring 162 against 127, a 21.6% margin. Notably, the DX12 result is the only gaming-centric workload in the dataset, and it favors NVIDIA. The pattern is consistent: AMD dominates in Metal and Vulkan compute, while NVIDIA dominates in OpenCL and DX12.

Averaging all four tests, the RX 550 lands at 11,075 points, while the GTX 960 averages 9,273. That puts the AMD card roughly 19.4% ahead in aggregate, but the raw averages obscure the split nature of the results. The RX 550's average is buoyed by its outlier Metal score. Remove that single test and the GTX 960 would hold the edge in the remaining three. The database's percentile rankings reflect this nuance: the RX 550 sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 960 sits at the 45th. Both are mid-pack parts, but the RX 550's compute-heavy wins push it slightly higher in the overall distribution.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 550 is the clear choice for Metal-based workloads, which are typical of Apple ecosystem applications, and for Vulkan compute tasks. Its 137.5% lead in Metal is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational gap in that specific API. Similarly, the 32.9% Vulkan advantage indicates that developers targeting cross-platform compute via Vulkan will see materially better throughput on the RX 550. For users whose primary software stack relies on these APIs, the RX 550 is the stronger card despite its lower raw spec sheet.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960, conversely, is the winner for OpenCL compute and for DX12 gaming workloads. The 41.5% OpenCL margin is substantial, and the 21.6% DX12 lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad shows that NVIDIA's architecture handles that particular DirectX 12 path more efficiently. For gamers or professionals running OpenCL-based acceleration, the GTX 960 is the better option. The GTX 960 also holds a notable advantage in raw shading resources, with 1,024 shading units versus 512, and double the texture mapping units and ROPs, which likely underpins its DX12 performance.

The use-case split is clean: AMD for Metal and Vulkan compute, NVIDIA for OpenCL and DX12 gaming. There is no ambiguity in the data. Each card wins exactly where its architecture is designed to excel.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 averages 11,075 points across all recorded tests, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 averages 9,273 points. The RX 550 leads by approximately 19.4%.

Q: How do the two cards compare in DirectX 12 gaming performance?

A: In 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 162, while the AMD Radeon RX 550 scores 127. That gives the GTX 960 a 21.6% advantage in this specific DX12 test.

Q: Is the AMD Radeon RX 550 better in any compute API?

A: Yes. The RX 550 wins Geekbench Metal by a 137.5% margin (20,838 vs. 8,773) and Geekbench Vulkan by a 32.9% margin (12,270 vs. 9,231).

Q: Does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 win any compute benchmark?

A: Yes. The GTX 960 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 18,925, which is 41.5% higher than the RX 550's 11,063.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 is at the 50th percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 is at the 45th percentile.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 550 has a transistor density of 21.4 million per mm², while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 has 12.9 million per mm². This reflects the RX 550's newer 14 nm process versus the GTX 960's 28 nm process.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially in their core configurations. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 packs 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The AMD Radeon RX 550 has half of each: 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These numbers explain the GTX 960's dominance in fill-rate-bound tests. The GTX 960 achieves a pixel rate of 37.70 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 75.39 GTexel/s, while the RX 550 manages 18.93 GPixel/s and 37.86 GTexel/s. The GTX 960's FP32 throughput is 2.413 TFLOPS, roughly double the RX 550's 1,211.4 GFLOPS.

Memory configurations are nearly identical. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 960 has a slight edge in bandwidth at 112.2 GB/s versus 112.0 GB/s, a difference that is effectively negligible. Memory clocks are also close: 1753 MHz for the GTX 960 and 1750 MHz for the RX 550. The RX 550 does support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (1,211.4 GFLOPS), while the GTX 960 lists no FP16 capability.

Power and physical requirements diverge sharply. The RX 550 has a 50 W TDP, no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 960 has a 120 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU. The RX 550 is also much shorter at 145 mm (5.7 inches) versus 241 mm (9.5 inches) for the GTX 960. Both are dual-slot cards. The bus interface differs: PCIe 3.0 x8 for the RX 550, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the GTX 960. Display outputs are similar in count, but the RX 550 offers HDMI 2.0b and DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 960 offers HDMI 2.0 and three DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 550 is built on GCN 4.0 architecture, codenamed Lexa, and belongs to the Polaris (RX 500) generation. It uses a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The die is 103 mm² and contains 2,200 million transistors. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 uses Maxwell 2.0 architecture, chip GM206, from the GeForce 900 generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, with a 228 mm² die and 2,940 million transistors. The RX 550's newer process node allows a much higher transistor density: 21.4M per mm² versus 12.9M per mm². The RX 550 also lists a successor in Vega, while the GTX 960's successor is GeForce 10. The RX 550's predecessor is Arctic Islands; the GTX 960's is GeForce 700.

API support differs in notable ways. The RX 550 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 960 supports DirectX 12 at feature level 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The higher DirectX feature level on the GTX 960 may contribute to its DX12 benchmark win. The RX 550's Vulkan support is older, but its Vulkan compute performance is still superior in the recorded data. Neither card includes ray tracing cores or tensor cores.

Release timing is also a differentiator. The GTX 960 launched on January 21, 2015, while the RX 550 arrived on April 19, 2017. The GTX 960's launch MSRP was 199 USD; the RX 550's was 79 USD. Both cards are now end-of-life. The architectural gap of roughly two years explains many of the performance characteristics: the RX 550 benefits from a newer process and denser transistor packing, while the GTX 960 leverages a larger die and more execution resources to win in traditional rasterization and OpenCL workloads.