AMD Radeon RX 6550S vs Intel Arc B770 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database entries for the AMD Radeon RX 6550S and the Intel Arc B770 show no direct head-to-head benchmark results, and neither GPU has an average benchmark score or wins tally populated. The two parts are configured with vastly different specifications, which makes the lack of measured comparisons a significant gap in the dataset. However, the raw specifications alone establish a clear hierarchy in compute and memory performance.

The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is exactly 4 times the 4.915 TFLOPS produced by the AMD Radeon RX 6550S. That is a 300% advantage in raw shading throughput. The Arc B770 also posts a pixel rate of 307.2 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s for the AMD part, a 4x gap as well. Texture rate follows the same pattern: 614.4 GTexel/s on the Intel side against 153.6 GTexel/s on the AMD side. These are not marginal differences; they represent a full generational class separation in rendering throughput.

Memory capacity and bandwidth reinforce the Intel advantage. The Arc B770 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, yielding 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6550S has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 128.0 GB/s. That is a 4x difference in both capacity and bandwidth. For any workload that scales with memory size or transfer speed, the Intel part will dominate. The AMD part’s 64-bit interface is typical of an entry-level mobile IGP, while the Intel card’s 256-bit bus targets mainstream desktop gaming.

Clock speeds are closer than the compute metrics suggest. Both GPUs share a 2400 MHz boost clock. The AMD part has a 2000 MHz base clock, while the Intel part has a 2100 MHz base clock, a 100 MHz difference. Memory clocks are also identical at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer rate. So the performance gap is not clock-driven; it comes entirely from the Intel part’s larger execution engine: 4096 shading units, 256 TMUs, and 128 ROPs versus 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs on the AMD side. The Intel GPU also has 32 ray tracing cores, twice the 16 on the AMD GPU.

Power draw scales with performance. The Arc B770 is rated at 225 W TDP and requires a dual-slot cooler, a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connector, and a 550 W suggested power supply. The RX 6550S is rated at 50 W TDP, uses an IGP slot width, and requires no power connectors. That is a 175 W difference in thermal envelope, which explains the performance gap but also limits where each part can be deployed. The AMD GPU is designed for thin-and-light laptops with no discrete power delivery. The Intel card is a full-sized desktop add-in board.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward split: the Intel Arc B770 is the superior GPU for any compute-intensive or memory-heavy workload, while the AMD Radeon RX 6550S is the only option for ultra-low-power integrated graphics in portable devices. The 4x differences in FP32 throughput, texture rate, pixel rate, memory capacity, and memory bandwidth are decisive. The Arc B770 has 4096 shading units versus 1024, 256 TMUs versus 64, 128 ROPs versus 32, and 32 ray tracing cores versus 16. No benchmark result exists in the database to soften this gap; the specifications are the only evidence.

The RX 6550S does have one clear advantage: power consumption. At 50 W TDP with no power connectors, it fits in a class where the 225 W Arc B770 cannot operate. The AMD part is an integrated GPU for mobile systems, while the Intel part is a discrete desktop card. The choice is not about performance parity; it is about form factor and system power budget. Users who need a GPU for a laptop with no external power will take the RX 6550S. Users who can supply 550 W from a power supply and have a dual-slot slot will take the Arc B770.

The database’s percentile for both GPUs is 50, meaning they sit at the median of all recorded GPUs in the database. This is a neutral position, but the specification gap between the two is anything but neutral. The Intel part is a high-end mainstream card by any measure, while the AMD part is an entry-level mobile IGP. The absence of head-to-head benchmarks makes a precise performance ranking impossible, but the architectural data leaves no ambiguity about which part is faster.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers, architectures, and process nodes. AMD uses the Navi 24 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, part of the Navi Mobile generation under the RX 6000M family. Intel uses the BMG-G31 chip with Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage generation under the Arc 7 series. AMD’s chip is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while Intel’s chip is on a 5 nm process at TSMC. The process node advantage goes to Intel, but both use the same foundry.

Die size and transistor density tell a partial story. AMD’s Navi 24 die measures 107 mm² with 5,400 million transistors, giving a transistor density of 50.5 million per mm². Intel’s BMG-G31 die measures 368 mm², but the transistor count is marked as unknown in the database. The Intel die is 261 mm² larger, which is consistent with its much larger execution engine. The AMD chip is a small, power-efficient part; the Intel chip is a large, high-throughput part.

Both GPUs support the same API feature set: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. So there is no software feature gap in terms of API level. The difference lies in hardware resources. Intel’s Xe2-HPG architecture brings 4096 shading units, 256 texture mapping units, and 128 render output units. AMD’s RDNA 2.0 brings 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Intel also has 32 ray tracing cores, double the 16 in the AMD part. Neither GPU has tensor cores listed in the database.

Memory architecture is a major divider. The AMD part uses a 64-bit memory bus with 4 GB of GDDR6 and 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel part uses a 256-bit bus with 16 GB of GDDR6 and 512.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel bus width is exactly 4 times the AMD width, and memory size and bandwidth follow the same multiplier. The AMD part’s memory clock is 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective transfer, identical to the Intel part’s memory clock. So the bandwidth difference is entirely a function of bus width.

The bus interface also differs. The RX 6550S uses PCIe 4.0 x4, a low-lane-count connection typical of mobile IGPs. The Arc B770 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, the full desktop interface. This affects how quickly the GPU can communicate with the CPU and system memory. For an IGP, x4 is sufficient; for a discrete card, x16 is standard. Display outputs differ as well: the AMD part is described as “Portable Device Dependent,” meaning outputs vary by laptop design, while the Intel part has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1.

Power delivery is another architectural distinction. The RX 6550S has no power connectors and an IGP slot width, meaning it draws power from the motherboard. The Arc B770 requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector, uses a dual-slot cooler, and needs a 550 W suggested power supply. The TDP figures are 50 W for AMD and 225 W for Intel. The release dates are also different: the RX 6550S launched on January 3, 2023, while the Arc B770 has a release date of December 31, 2025. The AMD part lists Polaris Mobile as its predecessor; the Intel part lists Alchemist as its predecessor.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc B770 delivers 19.66 TFLOPS of FP32, which is 4 times the 4.915 TFLOPS of the AMD Radeon RX 6550S.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The Arc B770 provides 512.0 GB/s over a 256-bit bus, while the RX 6550S provides 128.0 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. Both use GDDR6 memory at 16 Gbps effective.

Q: What are the power requirements for each GPU?

A: The RX 6550S has a 50 W TDP with no power connectors and an IGP slot width. The Arc B770 has a 225 W TDP, requires a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector, a dual-slot cooler, and a 550 W suggested power supply.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The hardware execution resources differ, but the API feature level is identical.

Q: What is the difference in ray tracing core count?

A: The Arc B770 has 32 ray tracing cores, while the RX 6550S has 16 ray tracing cores. That is exactly double the count in the Intel part.

Q: Which GPU has a larger die size?

A: The Intel BMG-G31 chip measures 368 mm², while the AMD Navi 24 chip measures 107 mm². The AMD chip is built on a 6 nm process, and the Intel chip on a 5 nm process, both at TSMC.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc B770 wins in every compute and memory metric recorded in the database. FP32 throughput, FP16 throughput, pixel rate, texture rate, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, ray tracing cores, memory size, memory bandwidth, and bus width all favor the Intel part by a factor of 2 to 4. The 19.66 TFLOPS FP32 score is 4 times the 4.915 TFLOPS of the AMD part. The 512.0 GB/s bandwidth is 4 times the 128.0 GB/s. The 16 GB memory capacity is 4 times the 4 GB. The 4096 shading units are 4 times the 1024. The 256 TMUs are 4 times the 64. The 128 ROPs are 4 times the 32. The 32 ray tracing cores are 2 times the 16. For any game or application that uses these resources, the Arc B770 is the clear winner.

The AMD Radeon RX 6550S wins in power efficiency and physical integration. The 50 W TDP is 175 W lower than the 225 W TDP of the Intel part. The AMD part requires no power connectors, fits in an IGP slot width, and uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface. The Intel part requires a 6-pin plus 8-pin power connector, a dual-slot cooler, and a 550 W power supply. The AMD part is designed for portable devices where the display outputs are dependent on the laptop design. The Intel part is a desktop card with fixed display outputs: 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. For systems that cannot supply discrete power or accommodate a dual-slot card, the RX 6550S is the only viable choice.

The base clock favors Intel slightly: 2100 MHz versus 2000 MHz for AMD. Boost clocks are identical at 2400 MHz. Memory clocks are identical at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective. So the AMD part does not lose on frequency; it loses on execution unit count and memory bus width. The 107 mm² die size and 5,400 million transistors on a 6 nm process make the AMD chip a compact, low-power solution. The 368 mm² Intel die is a high-performance part that requires active cooling and substantial power delivery.

The release timeline also separates the two. The RX 6550S launched on January 3, 2023, while the Arc B770 has a release date of December 31, 2025. The AMD part is an established mobile product; the Intel part is a newer desktop offering. The database lists no successor for either GPU, and the production status is “Active” for AMD while it is not populated for Intel. Neither part has a launch MSRP in the database.

In summary, the Intel Arc B770 is the performance winner across all compute, memory, and rendering metrics. The AMD Radeon RX 6550S is the integration and efficiency winner, suited for low-power mobile systems. The data does not support any other conclusion.