AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and AMD Radeon RX 5700 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data makes that gap unmistakable. The MX550 is a low-power integrated-class part designed for thin laptops, while the RX 5700 is a full-size desktop card built for high refresh gaming. Their recorded average scores, 26,421 for the MX550 and 22,170 for the RX 5700, are misleading at first glance, but the head-to-head results and architectural details clarify which card serves which purpose. The MX550 actually posts a higher average benchmark score across all recorded tests, yet the RX 5700 crushes it in every direct comparison available. This paradox stems from the different test suites each card was subjected to, and the data shows that the RX 5700 is the far stronger performer where it matters.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct head-to-head tests between these GPUs, and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 wins both by substantial margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 5700 scores 69,603 against the MX550's 20,372, a delta of -70.7% for the NVIDIA part. That means the RX 5700 delivers more than triple the compute throughput in this workload. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 5700 scores 64,166 versus 32,469 for the MX550, a delta of -49.4%. The AMD card nearly doubles the NVIDIA part's Vulkan performance. These are not close contests; the RX 5700 is in a different performance class entirely.

The MX550's overall average benchmark score of 26,421 is higher than the RX 5700's 22,170, but this reflects the tests each card was entered into rather than raw capability. The MX550 only has two recorded benchmarks, both from Geekbench, while the RX 5700 has eleven, including PassMark tests across DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, plus 2D and compute workloads. The RX 5700's average is dragged down by low scores in legacy tests like PassMark DirectX 9 (209) and DirectX 10 (87), which are not representative of modern gaming. In the two tests that directly compare them, the RX 5700 leads by margins that leave no room for interpretation.

Looking at the nearest rivals for each card reinforces the division. The MX550 sits near the AMD Radeon 860M (0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (0.3% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (-0.5% delta). This places it in the company of modern midrange and entry-level parts. The RX 5700, by contrast, is closest to the AMD Radeon RX 6700S (0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 Mobile (-1.2% delta), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB (1.4% delta). These rivals are all older or mobile versions of mainstream desktop cards, which is exactly where the RX 5700 belongs. The percentile rankings confirm this: the MX550 sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 5700 sits at the 67th. The MX550's higher percentile reflects its efficiency and modern feature set, not its raw output.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 has an average benchmark score of 26,421, while the AMD Radeon RX 5700 averages 22,170. However, the RX 5700 wins both head-to-head tests, indicating the MX550's average comes from a limited test set.

Q: How large is the performance gap in Vulkan workloads?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 5700 scores 64,166 against the MX550's 32,469, a delta of -49.4%. The AMD card is roughly twice as fast in this API.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference?

A: The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus with 448.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 5700 offers four times the capacity and nearly 4.7 times the bandwidth.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 5700, built on TSMC's 7 nm process, has 41.0 million transistors per square millimeter. The MX550, on TSMC's 12 nm process, has 23.5 million per square millimeter.

Q: What are the thermal design power ratings?

A: The MX550 has a TDP of 25 W and requires no power connectors. The RX 5700 has a TDP of 180 W and needs a 6-pin plus an 8-pin connector, with a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Q: Does the MX550 support the same APIs as the RX 5700?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 5700 also has recorded Metal benchmarks, but the API list is identical.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations and design philosophies. The MX550 uses the TU117SB chip, a Turing architecture part built on TSMC's 12 nm process at the 200 mm² die size. It packs 4,700 million transistors, giving it a density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. Turing was designed for efficiency and feature completeness, and the MX550 reflects that with support for DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The chip is small, with 1,024 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output units. Its FP32 throughput is 2.703 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rate is identical at 2.703 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio.

The RX 5700 uses the Navi 10 chip, built on RDNA 1.0 architecture and manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. The die is larger at 251 mm² but holds 10,300 million transistors, resulting in a density of 41.0 million per square millimeter. RDNA 1.0 was AMD's first generation of the RDNA architecture, designed to improve efficiency and scalability over the older GCN design. The RX 5700 has 2,304 shading units, 144 texture units, and 64 ROPs. Its FP32 performance is 7.949 TFLOPS, and its FP16 rate is 15.90 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio. The higher FP16 throughput indicates a different compute path, while the MX550's 1:1 ratio means it processes FP16 and FP32 at the same speed.

The process node difference is significant. The 7 nm process allows the RX 5700 to pack more than twice the transistors into a die that is only 25% larger by area. This translates directly into higher pixel and texture rates: the RX 5700 achieves 110.4 GPixel/s and 248.4 GTexel/s, while the MX550 manages 21.12 GPixel/s and 42.24 GTexel/s. The RX 5700 also has a wider memory interface, which we will cover in the next section, and its memory clock is higher at 1750 MHz versus 1500 MHz.

Specification Differences

The specification sheet shows a clear hierarchy. The MX550 has a base clock of 1065 MHz and a boost clock of 1320 MHz, with no game clock listed. The RX 5700 has a base clock of 1465 MHz, a boost clock of 1725 MHz, and a game clock of 1625 MHz. Even at base, the RX 5700 runs 400 MHz faster than the MX550's boost. Memory speeds differ as well: the MX550 runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the RX 5700 runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective.

Memory capacity and bandwidth are the starkest differences. The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. The RX 5700 has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 448.0 GB/s. That is a 4x capacity increase and a 4.67x bandwidth increase. For modern games that routinely exceed 4 GB of VRAM, the MX550's 2 GB is a hard limit, while the RX 5700 has headroom for high-resolution textures.

The power delivery systems are entirely different. The MX550 is an IGP (integrated graphics package) with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The RX 5700 is a dual-slot card measuring 268 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 36 mm in width, with a 180 W TDP, a 6-pin and 8-pin power connector, and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RX 5700 also uses a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface, while the MX550 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The RX 5700 has standard display outputs: one HDMI 2.0b and three DisplayPort 1.4a. The MX550's outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by laptop implementation.

Where Each One Wins

The MX550 wins in efficiency and footprint. Its 25 W TDP means it can be integrated into thin laptops without active cooling or large heatsinks. It has no power connectors, so it draws all power from the motherboard slot. Its 2 GB GDDR6 is sufficient for light tasks like video playback, office work, and older games. The MX550's average benchmark score of 26,421 and 72nd percentile ranking show it performs well relative to all GPUs, especially given its size. It also has a modern feature set with DirectX 12, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 support, matching the RX 5700 in API compatibility. The MX550's Geekbench scores, 20,372 in OpenCL and 32,469 in Vulkan, are respectable for an integrated part.

The RX 5700 wins in every performance metric that matters for gaming and compute. Its 7.949 TFLOPS FP32 is nearly triple the MX550's 2.703 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 110.4 GPixel/s is over five times the MX550's 21.12 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 248.4 GTexel/s is nearly six times the MX550's 42.24 GTexel/s. The 8 GB memory pool and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth allow it to handle modern game engines, 1440p resolutions, and high-detail settings. The RX 5700's head-to-head wins, 69,603 versus 20,372 in OpenCL and 64,166 versus 32,469 in Vulkan, demonstrate its dominance in compute-heavy workloads. Its nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB and the Radeon RX 6700S, which places it firmly in the mainstream desktop segment.

The RX 5700 also has a higher transistor density, 41.0M per mm² against the MX550's 23.5M per mm², which indicates a more advanced process and better efficiency per transistor. Its FP16 throughput of 15.90 TFLOPS is six times the MX550's 2.703 TFLOPS, making it far more capable for machine learning and compute tasks that use half precision. The RX 5700 also has a wider PCIe interface, x16 versus x8, which reduces bandwidth bottlenecks in data-intensive applications.

The Verdict

The choice between these two GPUs depends entirely on the use case, and the data points to a clear split. For a compact laptop or an ultraportable system where power draw is critical, the MX550 is the only viable option. Its 25 W TDP, IGP form factor, and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for machines that prioritize battery life and thermal restraint. The MX550's 72nd percentile ranking and average score of 26,421 are respectable for its class, and its modern API support ensures compatibility with current software. A user who needs basic GPU acceleration, light gaming, or media playback in a thin chassis would find the MX550 adequate.

For a desktop gaming rig or a workstation that handles 3D rendering, video editing, or machine learning, the RX 5700 is the obvious pick. Its 8 GB VRAM, 256-bit bus, and 448.0 GB/s bandwidth are essential for modern workloads. The RX 5700's head-to-head margins, 70.7% in OpenCL and 49.4% in Vulkan, show that it is not just faster but categorically more powerful. The 180 W TDP and dual-slot cooler require a proper PSU and case space, but the performance payoff is substantial. The RX 5700's launch MSRP was 349 USD, and its nearest rivals include the GTX 1060 6 GB and the RX 6700S, confirming its position as a mainstream desktop part.

The data does not support using the MX550 for anything beyond light duty. Its 2 GB memory is insufficient for modern games, and its FP32 throughput is less than one-third of the RX 5700's. The RX 5700, despite its lower average benchmark score, wins every direct comparison and offers a far larger feature set. A builder with access to both should choose the RX 5700 for any task that involves 3D graphics, and the MX550 only when size and power constraints leave no alternative. The verdict is unambiguous: the RX 5700 is the superior GPU in every performance category, while the MX550 is a specialized low-power component with a narrow role.