AMD Radeon RX 6550M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46702, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A scores 38691. This places the AMD part at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, with the NVIDIA part at the 81st percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 42536 against 39780 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, a lead of 6.9%.

Q: Which GPU wins in Vulkan performance and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test decisively, scoring 50867 versus 37601 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, a margin of 35.3%.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power between the two?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A has a TDP of 25 W. This means the NVIDIA part draws significantly less power.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has a memory bandwidth of 144.0 GB/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A has 96.00 GB/s. The AMD part delivers 50% more bandwidth.

Q: What are the production statuses of these GPUs?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M is listed as Active in production, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A is End-of-life.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to a clear overall winner: the AMD Radeon RX 6550M. It wins both head-to-head benchmark tests, holds a higher average score, and sits in a higher percentile among all GPUs. Its Vulkan advantage is particularly pronounced, suggesting a strong driver or architecture-level edge in that API.

However, the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A is not without a role. Its 25 W TDP is one-third of the AMD part's 80 W. For systems where thermal and power budgets are extremely tight, the NVIDIA part offers a substantially lower power draw while still delivering roughly 83% of the AMD part's average score. The data indicates that the MX570 A also has double the shading units (2048 versus 1024) and four times the tensor cores (64 versus none listed), which could matter for specific compute workloads that leverage those units.

Buyers who prioritize raw performance, higher memory bandwidth, and longevity should choose the AMD Radeon RX 6550M. Buyers who need the lowest possible power envelope and are willing to accept a measurable performance trade-off should consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A, especially given its end-of-life status may make it available in more compact or passively cooled designs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded benchmarks show a consistent pattern: AMD leads in both, but the magnitude differs sharply by API.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6550M scores 42536 against 39780 for the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A. That is a 6.9% advantage, a moderate but real gap. Both GPUs are capable of similar frame rates in OpenCL-bound workloads, but the AMD part holds a steady edge.

The Vulkan result is far more lopsided. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M posts 50867, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A manages only 37601. That is a 35.3% lead for AMD. This is the single largest performance differential in the dataset. It suggests that the RDNA 2.0 architecture in the RX 6550M handles Vulkan workloads with far greater efficiency than the Ampere-based MX570 A, possibly due to driver maturity or hardware scheduling differences.

Looking at the nearest rivals reinforces the picture. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M's average score of 46702 sits just 0.2% above the Intel Arc A530M (46614) and 0.2% above the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46601). It is 1.4% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 (46043) and 1.6% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45972). The RX 6550M is effectively in a tight cluster with these parts, meaning it trades blows with much larger GPUs.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A's average of 38691 sits essentially level with the AMD Radeon Pro 580X (38706, a 0% delta) and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5080 Mobile (38349, a 0.9% delta). It is 1% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 (38299) and 1.1% behind the AMD Radeon Pro 575X (39116). This places the MX570 A in a lower performance tier than the RX 6550M, roughly 17% behind in average score.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification category in the database. Process node: the AMD Radeon RX 6550M uses a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A uses an 8 nm process at Samsung. Transistor count: the AMD part has 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, while the NVIDIA part has 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. This gives the AMD part a higher transistor density of 50.5M per mm² versus 43.5M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M runs at a base clock of 2000 MHz with a boost of 2840 MHz and a game clock of 2560 MHz. The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A runs at a base clock of 832 MHz with a boost of 832 MHz (the base is 832 MHz and boost is 832 MHz in the data). The AMD part also lists a game clock, which the NVIDIA part does not.

Memory configurations diverge: the AMD Radeon RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 18 Gbps effective, yielding 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus at 12 Gbps effective, yielding 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth.

Compute units differ: the AMD part has 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA part has 2048 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The NVIDIA part also includes 64 tensor cores, while the AMD part lists no tensor cores. Both have 16 ray tracing cores. The pixel rate for AMD is 90.88 GPixel/s versus 36.96 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rates are 181.8 GTexel/s for AMD versus 73.92 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 throughput is 5.816 TFLOPS for AMD and 4.731 TFLOPS for NVIDIA. FP16 is 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1) for AMD and 4.731 TFLOPS (1:1) for NVIDIA.

Power and interface: the AMD part has a TDP of 80 W and a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface. The NVIDIA part has a TDP of 25 W and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. Both are integrated graphics packages with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. Release dates differ: the AMD part launched on 2023-01-03, while the NVIDIA part launched on 2021-12-16. The AMD part is active, the NVIDIA part is end-of-life.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It uses the Navi 24 chip and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation. The architecture supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

The NVIDIA GeForce MX570 A is built on the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. It uses the GA107SB chip and belongs to the GeForce MX (5xx) generation. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

A key architectural difference lies in the compute and tensor capabilities. The NVIDIA part includes 64 tensor cores, which the AMD part does not list, and it has twice the shading units (2048 versus 1024). However, the AMD part achieves much higher clock speeds and has a higher transistor density per square millimeter, which helps explain its substantial performance advantage despite fewer shading units.

The ray tracing core count is identical at 16 for both GPUs, but the implementation differs due to the underlying architectures: RDNA 2.0 versus Ampere. The FP16 to FP32 ratio also differs: the AMD part offers 2:1 FP16 throughput (11.63 TFLOPS), while the NVIDIA part offers 1:1 (4.731 TFLOPS). This means the AMD part can process half-precision workloads at twice its FP32 rate, a feature that may benefit certain machine learning or graphics workloads.

The memory subsystem differs in effective speed: the AMD part runs at 18 Gbps effective versus 12 Gbps for NVIDIA, which contributes to the 50% bandwidth advantage. Both use a 64-bit bus, but the AMD part packs more data per clock cycle.

Finally, the production status and release timing reflect different lifecycles: the AMD part is newer (2023) and active, while the NVIDIA part is older (2021) and end-of-life. This aligns with the AMD part's higher average benchmark score and higher percentile ranking, suggesting it is the more modern and capable design.