AMD Radeon RX 550X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains one head-to-head benchmark between these two cards: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 scores 12,830 points, while the AMD Radeon RX 550X scores 9,662 points. The delta is 32.8% in favor of the NVIDIA card, a substantial margin for a compute-oriented workload. This is the only direct comparison available, so the overall win tally stands at one for NVIDIA and zero for AMD.

Looking at broader database context, the GTX 590's average benchmark score is 12,830, placing it at the 52nd percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals cluster tightly around that figure: the AMD Radeon Pro 455 scores 12,831 (0% delta), the AMD FirePro W5100 scores 12,847 (0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon 740M scores 12,870 (0.3% behind), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 scores 12,773 (0.4% ahead). The GTX 590 essentially trades blows with these cards, sitting within a 1% band of all four neighbors.

The RX 550X, by contrast, has a lower average benchmark score of 10,481, derived from two recorded tests: 9,662 in OpenCL and 11,299 in Vulkan. Its percentile rank is 49, just three points below the GTX 590. The RX 550X's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 at 10,400 (0.8% behind the AMD card), the AMD Radeon R9 M275X at 10,582 (1% ahead), the AMD Radeon RX 6500M at 10,362 (1.2% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600S at 10,629 (1.4% ahead). The RX 550X is similarly competitive within its own neighborhood, but that neighborhood sits roughly 2,300 points lower than the GTX 590's.

The 32.8% OpenCL gap is not trivial. It means that in raw compute throughput, the older NVIDIA card outperforms the newer AMD card by about a third. The GTX 590's FP32 rating of 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus the RX 550X's 1,211.4 GFLOPS shows only a 2.7% theoretical difference, yet the real-world benchmark gap is far wider. That discrepancy suggests that memory bandwidth, driver efficiency, or other architectural factors play a significant role in the OpenCL result. The GTX 590's memory bandwidth is 164.0 GB/s over a 384-bit bus, while the RX 550X manages 96.00 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. Bandwidth differences of that magnitude often amplify compute workloads beyond what raw shader counts would predict.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 is the stronger performer in compute workloads. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 32.8%, and its average score sits above the RX 550X by roughly 22%. The GTX 590 also holds a higher percentile rank (52 versus 49), indicating that it outperforms a slightly larger share of the GPU population.

However, the RX 550X is not without its own advantages. Its Vulkan score of 11,299 demonstrates capability in a modern API that the GTX 590 cannot match, as the older card has no recorded Vulkan benchmark and its DirectX support is limited to 12 (11_0) rather than full 12 (12_0). The RX 550X also supports Vulkan 1.3 natively, while the GTX 590 has no listed Vulkan support at all.

For users prioritizing raw OpenCL compute performance, the GTX 590 is the clear choice based on recorded numbers. For those needing modern API support, lower power consumption, or more memory capacity, the RX 550X has structural advantages that the benchmark data does not capture. The GTX 590 demands 365 W and a 750 W suggested PSU with two 8-pin connectors, while the RX 550X draws only 50 W, requires no power connectors, and runs on a 250 W PSU. The RX 550X also offers 4 GB of memory versus 1,536 MB on the GTX 590.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only direct benchmark comparison?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 12,830 versus 9,662 for the AMD Radeon RX 550X, a 32.8% delta.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 590 has an average score of 12,830, while the RX 550X averages 10,481 across its two recorded tests (9,662 OpenCL and 11,299 Vulkan).

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The GTX 590 has a TDP of 365 W with a suggested PSU of 750 W and requires two 8-pin connectors. The RX 550X has a TDP of 50 W, a suggested PSU of 250 W, and needs no power connectors.

Q: Which card has more memory?

A: The RX 550X has 4 GB of GDDR5, while the GTX 590 has 1,536 MB of GDDR5. The GTX 590's bus is wider at 384 bit versus 128 bit, giving it higher bandwidth at 164.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s.

Q: Do both cards support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The RX 550X supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 590 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but only the RX 550X lists Vulkan 1.3 support.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: Both cards are end-of-life products. The GTX 590 was released on 2011-03-23, and the RX 550X was released on 2018-12-15.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every specification category. The GTX 590 uses a 40 nm process node from TSMC, while the RX 550X uses a 14 nm node from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 3,000 million versus 2,200 million, and die sizes are 520 mm² versus 103 mm². Transistor density is dramatically different: 5.8M per mm² on the GTX 590 versus 21.4M per mm² on the RX 550X.

Clock speeds show the RX 550X with a base clock of 1100 MHz and boost of 1183 MHz, while the GTX 590 has no listed base or boost clocks. Memory clocks differ as well: the GTX 590 runs at 854 MHz (3.4 Gbps effective), and the RX 550X runs at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). Memory capacity, bus width, and bandwidth all favor different cards: the GTX 590 has a wider bus and higher bandwidth, but the RX 550X has more capacity.

Shading units are identical at 512, but texture mapping units and raster output units differ: 64 TMUs and 48 ROPs on the GTX 590 versus 32 TMUs and 16 ROPs on the RX 550X. Pixel rates are close at 19.46 GPixel/s versus 18.93 GPixel/s, as are texture rates at 38.91 GTexel/s versus 37.86 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,244.2 GFLOPS versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS, and the RX 550X additionally supports FP16 at 1,211.4 GFLOPS (1:1), which the GTX 590 does not list.

Power requirements diverge sharply: 365 W versus 50 W TDP, 750 W versus 250 W suggested PSU, and 2x 8-pin connectors versus none. The GTX 590 uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the RX 550X uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs differ: 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort on the GTX 590 versus 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a on the RX 550X. Physical dimensions also differ, with the GTX 590 measuring 279 mm long, 111 mm high, and 40 mm wide, while the RX 550X is only 145 mm long.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 590 is built on Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF110 chip, part of the GeForce 500 generation. The RX 550X uses GCN 4.0 architecture with the Lexa chip, part of the Polaris (RX 500X) generation. These are fundamentally different design philosophies: Fermi 2.0 is an older, power-hungry compute-oriented architecture, while GCN 4.0 is a more modern, efficient design from AMD.

The process node difference is stark: 40 nm versus 14 nm. This explains the transistor density gap of 5.8M per mm² versus 21.4M per mm², even though the GTX 590 has more total transistors. The die size difference, 520 mm² versus 103 mm², reflects both the older process and the larger GPU design. The GTX 590's previous generation is GeForce 400 and its successor is GeForce 600, while the RX 550X's predecessor is Polaris and its successor is Vega.

API support reflects the architectural generation gap. The GTX 590 lists DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6 but no Vulkan support. The RX 550X lists DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 550X also has FP16 compute capability at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, a feature absent from the GTX 590's specifications. The RX 550X's memory type is GDDR5 at 6 Gbps effective, whereas the GTX 590's GDDR5 runs at 3.4 Gbps effective, though the GTX 590 compensates with a much wider 384-bit interface.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 590 wins in raw compute benchmark performance. Its OpenCL score of 12,830 is 32.8% higher than the RX 550X's 9,662. It also has higher pixel rate (19.46 versus 18.93 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (38.91 versus 37.86 GTexel/s), and higher FP32 throughput (1,244.2 versus 1,211.4 GFLOPS). Its memory bandwidth advantage is substantial at 164.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. For any workload that stresses raw throughput, whether compute or memory-bound, the GTX 590's recorded data makes it the pick.

The RX 550X wins in efficiency and modern feature support. Its TDP of 50 W is a fraction of the GTX 590's 365 W, and it requires no power connectors with a 250 W PSU suggestion. It has 4 GB of memory, which is more than double the GTX 590's 1,536 MB. It supports DirectX 12 (12_0) versus the GTX 590's 11_0 feature level, and it has Vulkan 1.3 support, which the GTX 590 lacks entirely. Its Vulkan benchmark score of 11,299 shows credible performance in a modern API that the GTX 590 cannot run. The RX 550X is also far smaller at 145 mm in length versus 279 mm, making it suitable for compact systems.

Use-case conclusions from the data: for compute-heavy tasks using OpenCL, the GTX 590 is measurably faster and should be chosen despite its power draw. For systems with limited power delivery, small chassis, or a need for modern graphics APIs like Vulkan, the RX 550X is the logical selection. The GTX 590's higher percentile rank (52 versus 49) reinforces its overall performance edge, but the RX 550X's feature set and efficiency make it the better fit for contemporary software environments.