AMD Radeon RX 6550M vs NVIDIA Quadro P6000 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data splits cleanly between these two GPUs, with the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 taking both of the head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the Quadro P6000 records a score of 66,382 against 42,536 for the AMD Radeon RX 6550M, a 56.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap narrows somewhat but remains decisive: 73,590 versus 50,867, a 44.7% lead for the NVIDIA card. The database shows zero wins for the AMD mobile part in these two tests.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. The Quadro P6000 is the compute-oriented workstation card, built for sustained heavy workloads where OpenCL and Vulkan throughput matter. Its scores place it at the 90th percentile of all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 69,986. The RX 6550M, by contrast, sits at the 85th percentile with an average of 46,702. That percentile gap of five points reflects a meaningful drop in raw performance, but the RX 6550M is a mobile part designed for lower power envelopes, and its niche is portable systems rather than static workstations.

For users choosing between a desktop workstation accelerator and a mobile GPU, the data suggests the Quadro P6000 wins every measured workload category. The RX 6550M does not take a single recorded test. However, the RX 6550M is the only one of the two that is still in active production; the Quadro P6000 is end-of-life. That status difference matters for system builders who need ongoing availability, even if it does not change the raw performance ranking.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and design philosophies. The Quadro P6000 uses the GP102 chip built on NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, manufactured on a 16 nm process at TSMC. It packs 11,800 million transistors into a 471 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 25.1 million per square millimeter. The RX 6550M uses AMD's Navi 24 chip based on RDNA 2.0, built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a much smaller 107 mm² die, achieving 50.5 million transistors per square millimeter. That means the AMD chip has roughly double the transistor density of the NVIDIA chip, a direct result of the newer process node.

The compute resources differ substantially. The Quadro P6000 has 3,840 shading units, 240 texture mapping units, and 96 raster operation pipelines. The RX 6550M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The AMD part does include 16 ray tracing cores, which the Pascal-based NVIDIA card lacks entirely, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the Quadro P6000 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Memory configurations are also starkly different. The Quadro P6000 carries 24 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 432.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Clock behavior favors the AMD part on paper: the RX 6550M has a 2000 MHz base clock and a 2840 MHz boost clock, with a 2560 MHz game clock, while the Quadro P6000 runs at 1506 MHz base and 1645 MHz boost. Memory clocks also differ, with the AMD part at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) versus 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective) for the NVIDIA card. The Quadro P6000 compensates with far more memory and a six times wider bus.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the raw resource counts. The Quadro P6000 reaches 157.9 GPixel/s and 394.8 GTexel/s, while the RX 6550M manages 90.88 GPixel/s and 181.8 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance tells a similar story: 12.63 TFLOPS FP32 for the NVIDIA card versus 5.816 TFLOPS for the AMD card. Interestingly, the RX 6550M is far stronger in FP16, delivering 11.63 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, while the Quadro P6000 only manages 197.4 GFLOPS at a 1:64 ratio. The RX 6550M also has ray tracing hardware, which the older NVIDIA card does not.

Power and physical design diverge completely. The Quadro P6000 is a dual-slot card with a 250 W TDP, requiring one 8-pin power connector and a 600 W suggested power supply. It measures 267 mm in length and 111 mm in height, with outputs of one DVI and four DisplayPort 1.4a connections. The RX 6550M is an integrated GPU package (IGP) with an 80 W TDP, no power connectors, and no published dimensions; display outputs are listed as portable device dependent. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x4.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Both recorded head-to-head tests go to the Quadro P6000, but the margins differ enough to draw some conclusions about workload scaling. In Geekbench OpenCL, the NVIDIA card scores 66,382 versus 42,536 for the RX 6550M. That 56.1% delta is the larger of the two wins. OpenCL workloads tend to stress raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and driver efficiency, all areas where the Quadro P6000 has an enormous advantage in shading units, ROPs, memory capacity, and bus width.

The Vulkan test shows a smaller but still clear margin. The Quadro P6000 scores 73,590 against 50,867, a 44.7% lead. Vulkan is a lower-overhead API that can narrow gaps between differently architected GPUs, and the RX 6550M's higher boost clock of 2840 MHz may help it close some of the distance. Even so, the absolute gap remains large: 22,723 points in Vulkan versus 23,846 points in OpenCL.

Looking at the rival context from the database adds perspective. The Quadro P6000's average score of 69,986 sits within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 (69,870) and 0.2% below the NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile (70,140). It also beats the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829) by 1.2% from below, meaning the RX 6600 LE is actually faster by that margin, and it leads the NVIDIA CMP 90HX (69,000) by 1.4%. The RX 6550M, with an average of 46,702, is nearly tied with the Intel Arc A530M (46,614, a 0.2% edge for AMD) and the AMD Radeon RX 5600M (46,601, also a 0.2% edge). It runs ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A2000 (46,043) by 1.4% and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45,972) by 1.6%. In other words, the Quadro P6000 competes in the upper tier of workstation and high-end desktop GPUs, while the RX 6550M sits in the midrange mobile segment.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 66,382 against 42,536 for the AMD Radeon RX 6550M, a 56.1% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon RX 6550M beat the Quadro P6000 in any benchmark?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and the Quadro P6000 wins both. The win count is 2 for NVIDIA and 0 for AMD.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in ray tracing support?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M includes 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The NVIDIA Quadro P6000 has no ray tracing cores and only supports DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: What are the memory capacities and bandwidths?

A: The Quadro P6000 has 24 GB of GDDR5X on a 384-bit bus with 432.8 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The RX 6550M has a 2000 MHz base clock and 2840 MHz boost clock. The Quadro P6000 runs at 1506 MHz base and 1645 MHz boost. The AMD part also has a 2560 MHz game clock, while the NVIDIA card has no game clock listed.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Quadro P6000 is end-of-life, while the RX 6550M is active. The Quadro P6000 was released in 2016, and the RX 6550M in 2023.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy: the Quadro P6000 is the stronger GPU in every measured test. Its 56.1% OpenCL lead and 44.7% Vulkan lead over the RX 6550M are substantial, and its 90th percentile ranking versus the RX 6550M's 85th percentile confirms the gap in overall database standing. Users who need maximum compute throughput, large memory capacity, and high bandwidth for workstation tasks should choose the Quadro P6000, assuming they can accommodate its 250 W TDP, dual-slot footprint, and desktop PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Its 24 GB of GDDR5X memory and 432.8 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for large datasets that would not fit in the RX 6550M's 4 GB frame buffer.

The RX 6550M is the choice for portable systems. It draws only 80 W, requires no power connectors, and is listed as an IGP package with portable device dependent outputs. Its 6 nm process and 50.5M transistors per square millimeter show a much denser, more modern design. It also brings features the older NVIDIA card lacks: 16 ray tracing cores, DirectX 12 Ultimate support, and strong FP16 performance at 11.63 TFLOPS. For a laptop user who needs current API support and ray tracing capability in a low-power package, the RX 6550M is the only viable option between these two, despite losing both head-to-head tests.

The production status reinforces this split. The Quadro P6000 is end-of-life, meaning new systems should not rely on it for long-term availability. The RX 6550M remains active. So the verdict is workload dependent: raw performance favors the Quadro P6000, while mobility, modern features, and ongoing availability favor the RX 6550M.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category in the database. The Quadro P6000 uses a 16 nm process, the RX 6550M a 6 nm process. Transistor counts are 11,800 million versus 5,400 million, and die sizes are 471 mm² versus 107 mm². Transistor density is 25.1M per mm² for NVIDIA and 50.5M per mm² for AMD. Base clocks are 1506 MHz versus 2000 MHz, boost clocks 1645 MHz versus 2840 MHz, with a 2560 MHz game clock listed only for the AMD part. Memory clocks are 1127 MHz (9 Gbps effective) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Memory capacity is 24 GB versus 4 GB, type is GDDR5X versus GDDR6, bus width is 384 bit versus 64 bit, and bandwidth is 432.8 GB/s versus 144.0 GB/s. Shading units are 3,840 versus 1,024, TMUs 240 versus 64, and ROPs 96 versus 32. The RX 6550M has 16 ray tracing cores; the Quadro P6000 has none. Pixel rates are 157.9 GPixel/s versus 90.88 GPixel/s, texture rates 394.8 GTexel/s versus 181.8 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 12.63 TFLOPS versus 5.816 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 197.4 GFLOPS (1:64) versus 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1). TDP is 250 W versus 80 W. The Quadro P6000 is dual-slot with one 8-pin connector and a 600 W suggested power supply; the RX 6550M is IGP with no connectors and no suggested PSU. Bus interfaces are PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x4. Display outputs are one DVI and four DisplayPort 1.4a versus portable device dependent. The Quadro P6000 measures 267 mm by 111 mm; the RX 6550M has no listed dimensions. DirectX support is 12 (12_1) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2), with both sharing OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The Quadro P6000 has a launch MSRP of 5,999 USD.