AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti represent two distinct eras of graphics hardware, separated by over a decade of architectural evolution. The data set shows a single direct head-to-head benchmark result, but that result is decisive, revealing a performance gap so vast that it defines the entire comparison. The RX 6400's average benchmark score of 6001 places it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 550 Ti's 5731 average score lands it in the 33rd percentile; on the surface, these aggregate positions look similar, but the specific test tells a different story.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the data is Geekbench OpenCL, and the outcome is nothing short of lopsided. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32,011 points, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti manages only 5,731 points. This translates to a delta of 458.6% in favor of the RX 6400. In practical terms, the RX 6400 delivers over five and a half times the raw compute performance of the GTX 550 Ti in this workload.

This single delta is the most important number in the entire comparison. A 458.6% advantage is not an incremental improvement; it represents a generational leap in compute capability. The RX 6400's FP32 throughput of 3.565 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 550 Ti's 691.2 GFLOPS, a difference that directly explains the OpenCL result. The GTX 550 Ti, with its Fermi 2.0 architecture, simply cannot compete with the RDNA 2.0-based Navi 24 chip in raw number crunching.

It is importantly the GTX 550 Ti has no other benchmark entries in the data, so the OpenCL result stands as its only measured performance indicator. The RX 6400, however, has a full suite of scores, including a Passmark G3D score of 7673 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 16372. These additional results are not directly comparable to the GTX 550 Ti, but they provide context for the RX 6400's overall capability. The wins column confirms the sweep: 1 win for the RX 6400, 0 for the GTX 550 Ti.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins in the only direct comparison available. There is no benchmark in the dataset where the GTX 550 Ti comes out ahead. The older card's best hope would be in legacy DirectX 9 or 10 workloads, but the RX 6400 also posts scores there—93 and 54 in Passmark DirectX 9 and 10, respectively—while the GTX 550 Ti has no such entries to challenge them.

The RX 6400's strengths are broad. Its Passmark G2D score of 722 indicates solid 2D and desktop rendering performance, and its Passmark GPU Compute score of 2812 shows it can handle general-purpose compute tasks. The GTX 550 Ti, with only a Geekbench OpenCL score to its name, cannot claim wins in any category measured here. For users running OpenCL-accelerated applications, the RX 6400 is the only viable choice based on data. For older games or applications that rely on DirectX 11, the RX 6400's Passmark DirectX 11 score of 70 suggests it remains functional, whereas the GTX 550 Ti's architecture, limited to DirectX 12 (11_0), may struggle with newer feature sets.

The GTX 550 Ti does have one theoretical advantage: its 192-bit memory bus versus the RX 6400's 64-bit bus. However, the RX 6400 compensates with GDDR6 memory running at 16 Gbps effective, yielding 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is higher than the GTX 550 Ti's 98.50 GB/s from GDDR5 at 4.1 Gbps. Memory bandwidth is not the deciding factor here; raw compute is.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different technologies, and the data highlights every major divergence. The RX 6400 uses the Navi 24 chip on TSMC's 6 nm process, packing 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The GTX 550 Ti, in contrast, uses the GF116 chip on TSMC's 40 nm process, with 1,170 million transistors spread across a much larger 238 mm² die, resulting in just 4.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The density difference—over 10 times—explains why the RX 6400 can offer vastly more compute in a smaller, cooler package.

The RX 6400 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, along with 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 550 Ti has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. Its DirectX 12 support is limited to the 11_0 feature level, and it has no Vulkan support listed. This means the RX 6400 is ready for modern graphics APIs, while the GTX 550 Ti is effectively a legacy part.

Memory configurations also differ sharply. The RX 6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6, while the GTX 550 Ti has only 1024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5. The RX 6400's 128.0 GB/s bandwidth exceeds the GTX 550 Ti's 98.50 GB/s, despite the latter's wider bus. Power consumption tells another story: the RX 6400 is rated at 53 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the GTX 550 Ti draws 116 W and needs a single 6-pin connector. The RX 6400 is also a single-slot card, whereas the GTX 550 Ti is dual-slot. The RX 6400's suggested PSU is 250 W, compared to 300 W for the GTX 550 Ti, meaning the newer card is far more efficient.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the superior product in every measurable way. The 458.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is overwhelming, and its architecture supports modern features like ray tracing and DirectX 12 Ultimate that the GTX 550 Ti lacks entirely. The RX 6400 also offers more memory, higher bandwidth, lower power draw, and a smaller physical footprint. Its 35th percentile ranking among all GPUs is slightly higher than the GTX 550 Ti's 33rd, but the average scores (6001 vs 5731) are closer than the head-to-head result suggests, because the RX 6400's benchmark suite includes more demanding tests that lower its average.

Who should pick the RX 6400? Anyone needing a modern, efficient GPU for DirectX 12 or Vulkan workloads, or anyone who wants ray tracing capability in a low-power, single-slot form factor. Who should pick the GTX 550 Ti? The data offers no compelling reason. Its only benchmark score is far lower, its architecture is obsolete, and it consumes more power while delivering less performance. The GTX 550 Ti might appeal to a collector or someone needing legacy DVI outputs, but for any performance-oriented task, the RX 6400 is the clear choice.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon RX 6400 than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 6400 scores 32,011, which is 458.6% higher than the GTX 550 Ti's 5,731 in the same test.

Q: Does the GTX 550 Ti support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 550 Ti has no ray tracing cores listed, while the RX 6400 includes 12 RT cores.

Q: Which card has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The RX 6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 550 Ti has 1024 MB of GDDR5 with 98.50 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RX 6400 has a TDP of 53 W and requires no power connectors. The GTX 550 Ti has a TDP of 116 W and needs one 6-pin connector.

Q: Are they comparable in overall GPU percentile rankings?

A: They are close, with the RX 6400 in the 35th percentile and the GTX 550 Ti in the 33rd percentile, but the direct benchmark shows a massive performance gap.

Q: Which card supports more modern graphics APIs?

A: The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 550 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, with no Vulkan support.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 6400 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 107 mm² | 238 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 50.5M / mm² | 4.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1923 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 2321 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) | 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 98.50 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 192 |

| TMUs | 48 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 24 |

| RT Cores | 12 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 74.27 GPixel/s | 7.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 111.4 GTexel/s | 28.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 3.565 TFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 53 W | 116 W |

| Slot Width | Single-slot | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | null |

| Launch MSRP | 159 USD | 149 USD |