GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M and NVIDIA RTX A6000 are designed for completely different worlds: one is a power-efficient mobile GPU for thin laptops, the other is a dual-slot workstation behemoth. The benchmark data confirms this split, showing a dominant NVIDIA victory in raw compute, but the AMD card’s efficiency and mobility make it a relevant option for specific portable workloads. The numbers below quantify exactly how large that performance gap is and what it means for real-world usage.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct comparison is brief because the FACT PACK only includes two shared tests: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the undisputed winner, and the margins are enormous.

• Geekbench OpenCL: The RTX A6000 scores 193,937, while the RX 6550M manages 42,536. That is a delta of -78.1% for the AMD card, meaning the NVIDIA GPU delivers roughly 4.5 times the raw compute throughput. This is not a close race; it is a category difference. OpenCL performance typically scales with shading units and memory bandwidth, and the A6000 has vastly more of both.

• Geekbench Vulkan: The gap narrows slightly but remains decisive. The RTX A6000 posts 164,462, versus 50,867 for the RX 6550M. The delta is -69.1%, so the NVIDIA card still leads by more than 3x. Vulkan is often more efficient on AMD architectures, but the sheer hardware advantage of the A6000 overwhelms any architectural efficiency gains.

Overall, the head-to-head record is 0 wins for the AMD card and 2 wins for the NVIDIA card. The percentile rankings tell a similar story: the RX 6550M sits at the 85th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A6000 is at the 84th percentile. Despite the A6000's massive victory in these tests, its average benchmark score of 44,075 is actually lower than the RX 6550M's average of 46,702. This is because the A6000's average is dragged down by its Passmark scores (e.g., 155 in DirectX 10, 87 in DirectX 12), which are likely measured under different driver or workload conditions. For context, the RX 6550M's nearest rival is the Intel Arc A530M at 46,614 (0.2% delta), while the RTX A6000's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti at 44,795 (-1.6% delta).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in shared benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins both shared tests decisively. It scores 193,937 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 42,536 for the AMD Radeon RX 6550M, and 164,462 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 50,867. The deltas are -78.1% and -69.1% respectively, meaning NVIDIA leads by roughly 4.5x and 3.2x.

Q: Does the AMD card have any advantage in average benchmark scores?

A: Surprisingly, yes. The RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46,702, which is higher than the RTX A6000's 44,075. However, this is because the A6000's average includes several low Passmark scores (e.g., 155 in DirectX 10, 87 in DirectX 12) that likely reflect legacy or specific API tests, not its general compute capability.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The RTX A6000 has 48 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 384-bit bus, yielding 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6550M has only 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 144.0 GB/s. The NVIDIA card has 12x the capacity and over 5x the bandwidth.

Q: Which card is more power-efficient per the data?

A: The AMD card is dramatically more power-efficient. The RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W, while the RTX A6000 has a TDP of 300 W. The AMD card also requires no power connectors and is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor), whereas the NVIDIA card is dual-slot with an 8-pin EPS connector and a suggested PSU of 700 W.

Q: What are the production statuses of these cards?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M is listed as "Active" production, while the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is "End-of-life." The A6000 was released earlier (2020-10-04) and has a successor (Workstation Ada), while the RX 6550M was released later (2023-01-03) and has no listed successor.

Q: How do their shading unit counts compare?

A: The RTX A6000 has 10,752 shading units, compared to just 1,024 on the RX 6550M. The NVIDIA card also has 336 TMUs and 112 ROPs, versus 64 TMUs and 32 ROPs on the AMD card. This is a 10.5x difference in shading units.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M uses the Navi 24 chip, which is based on RDNA 2.0 architecture and manufactured on a 6 nm process by TSMC. The chip packs 5,400 million transistors into a die size of just 107 mm², yielding a transistor density of 50.5M per mm². In contrast, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 uses the GA102 chip, based on Ampere architecture, manufactured on an 8 nm process by Samsung. This chip is far larger at 628 mm², containing 28,300 million transistors, but its density is slightly lower at 45.1M per mm².

The clock speeds tell a story of power versus efficiency. The RX 6550M runs at a base of 2000 MHz and boosts to 2840 MHz, with a game clock of 2560 MHz. The RTX A6000 is much slower in raw clock terms, with a base of 1410 MHz and a boost of 1800 MHz. However, the NVIDIA card compensates with sheer scale: its 10,752 shading units and 84 RT cores dwarf the AMD card's 1,024 shading units and 16 RT cores. The A6000 also has 336 tensor cores, which the RX 6550M lacks entirely.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The RX 6550M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with memory running at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX A6000 uses 48 GB of GDDR6 on a 384-bit bus, with memory at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for 768.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card's bus width is six times larger, and its bandwidth is over five times higher.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, the RTX A6000 is a dual-slot workstation card measuring 267 mm (10.5 inches) long and 112 mm (4.4 inches) tall, with 4x DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The RX 6550M is an IGP with portable-device-dependent display outputs and no physical dimensions listed. The AMD card uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: for any workload that relies on raw compute, the NVIDIA RTX A6000 is the superior choice. Its 193,937 OpenCL score and 164,462 Vulkan score are multiples of what the RX 6550M can achieve, and its 48 GB of memory with 768.0 GB/s bandwidth is in a completely different class from the AMD card's 4 GB and 144.0 GB/s. This is a workstation card designed for massive datasets, rendering, and AI workloads where the 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores provide acceleration that the RX 6550M cannot offer.

However, the RTX A6000 is not a practical choice for every scenario. Its 300 W TDP, dual-slot form factor, and requirement for a 700 W PSU make it unsuitable for portable systems. The RX 6550M, with its 80 W TDP, IGP form factor, and no power connectors, is the only option here for a thin laptop. Its higher average benchmark score (46,702 vs 44,075) is a statistical quirk driven by the A6000's low Passmark numbers, but it does suggest the AMD card is not without merit in specific API tests.

The production status is also telling: the RX 6550M is Active, while the RTX A6000 is End-of-life with a successor already in the Workstation Ada generation. If you need a current, power-sipping mobile GPU, the RX 6550M is the logical pick. If you need maximum compute and memory in a desktop workstation, the RTX A6000 is the clear winner, provided you can accommodate its power and size requirements.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6550M | NVIDIA RTX A6000 |

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

| Chip | Navi 24 | GA102 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 28,300 million |

| Die Size | 107 mm² | 628 mm² |

| Base Clock | 2000 MHz | 1410 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2840 MHz | 1800 MHz |

| Memory Size | 4 GB GDDR6 | 48 GB GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 144.0 GB/s | 768.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1,024 | 10,752 |

| TMUs | 64 | 336 |

| ROPs | 32 | 112 |

| RT Cores | 16 | 84 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 336 |

| Pixel Rate | 90.88 GPixel/s | 201.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 181.8 GTexel/s | 604.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 5.816 TFLOPS | 38.71 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1) | 38.71 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 80 W | 300 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 8-pin EPS |

| Suggested PSU | None | 700 W |

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

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2023-01-03 | 2020-10-04 |

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon RX 6550M wins on:

• Efficiency: The 80 W TDP is a fraction of the RTX A6000's 300 W, and it needs no auxiliary power connectors, making it the only viable choice for battery-powered systems.
• Portability: As an IGP with no listed dimensions, it can fit in ultra-thin laptops, whereas the A6000 is a 267 mm dual-slot card.
• Active production: It is currently available as a new product, while the A6000 is end-of-life.
• Average benchmark score: Its 46,702 average beats the A6000's 44,075, driven by the NVIDIA card's weak Passmark DirectX scores.

NVIDIA RTX A6000 wins on:

• Compute performance: The 193,937 OpenCL and 164,462 Vulkan scores are roughly 4.5x and 3.2x higher, respectively.
• Memory capacity and bandwidth: 48 GB and 768.0 GB/s versus 4 GB and 144.0 GB/s is a 12x and 5.3x advantage, critical for large datasets.
• Parallel processing: With 10,752 shading units, 336 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, it has 10.5x, 5.25x, and 3.5x the resources of the AMD card.
• Professional features: 84 RT cores and 336 tensor cores enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI inference, which the RX 6550M cannot match.
• Interface bandwidth: PCIe 4.0 x16 provides four times the bus lanes of the RX 6550M's x4 interface.

For a laptop user who plays light games or does casual compute, the RX 6550M is the practical choice. For a professional rendering or AI workstation, the RTX A6000 is the only card in this comparison that has the memory, compute, and feature set to handle serious workloads.