AMD Radeon RX 6550S vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the AMD Radeon RX 6550S and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. Neither product has recorded benchmark scores, and the wins tally sits at zero for both sides. This absence of data reflects the fundamental mismatch in their design targets, not an equivalence in capability.

The AMD Radeon RX 6550S delivers 4.915 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS. That is a 14.1x gap in raw single-precision throughput. The FP16 comparison is even more lopsided: the RX 6550S achieves 9.830 TFLOPS using a 2:1 ratio, while the B200 SXM6 sustains 69.34 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio. The NVIDIA part matches its FP32 rate exactly in FP16, meaning it does not rely on packed math to reach higher half-precision numbers.

Memory bandwidth tells a similar story. The RX 6550S accesses 128.0 GB/s across a 64-bit bus, while the B200 SXM6 moves 8.19 TB/s over an 8192-bit interface. The NVIDIA accelerator has 64 times the bandwidth, which is consistent with its role in massive parallel workloads where data movement dominates execution time.

Texture and pixel throughput follow the same direction. The RX 6550S produces 153.6 GTexel/s and 76.80 GPixel/s. The B200 SXM6 reaches 1,083.4 GTexel/s but only 43.92 GPixel/s. The NVIDIA part has 7.1x the texture rate but only 57% of the pixel rate. That inversion matters: the B200 SXM6 is not built for rasterization-heavy graphics work, while the RX 6550S retains traditional display pipeline capabilities.

The RX 6550S has a 50th percentile ranking among all GPUs in the database, matching the B200 SXM6's 50th percentile. Neither has an average benchmark score recorded, so percentile placement reflects specification-based classification rather than measured results. Both parts sit in the middle of the distribution when ranked purely by hardware attributes, which is a statistical artifact of comparing a low-power mobile GPU to a server accelerator.

Architecture Differences

The RX 6550S uses the Navi 24 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It belongs to the Navi Mobile generation within the RX 6000M series. The B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip on Blackwell architecture, also fabricated at TSMC but on a 5 nm node, and belongs to the Server Blackwell generation.

Transistor counts differ dramatically. The Navi 24 packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a density of 50.5 million transistors per square millimeter. The GB100 contains 208,000 million transistors across a 1628 mm² die, achieving 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter. The NVIDIA chip has 38.5x more transistors and occupies 15.2x more silicon area, with 2.5x higher transistor density.

The RX 6550S operates at a 2000 MHz base clock and 2400 MHz boost, with a game clock of 2170 MHz. The B200 SXM6 has a 120 MHz base clock and 1830 MHz boost. Despite the low base clock, the NVIDIA part reaches a boost frequency only 23.8% below the AMD part's boost, which is remarkable given the 1000 W thermal envelope versus 50 W for the RX 6550S.

Compute unit organization diverges significantly. The RX 6550S has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray accelerators. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 18.5x more shaders and 9.25x more TMUs, but fewer ROPs. The B200 SXM6 relies on tensor cores for its primary compute path, while the RX 6550S has no tensor cores at all.

Memory subsystems could not be more different. The RX 6550S uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, with memory clocked at 2000 MHz and 16 Gbps effective data rate. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus, with memory clocked at 2000 MHz and 8 Gbps effective. The AMD part has 45x less capacity and 64x less bandwidth. The NVIDIA bus width is 128x wider, which explains how it achieves 8.19 TB/s despite the lower effective data rate per pin.

Power delivery reflects the intended environments. The RX 6550S carries a 50 W TDP, uses no power connectors, and fits as an IGP (integrated graphics processor). The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP, mounts as an SXM module, and requires a 1400 W suggested PSU. The bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x4 for the AMD part, PCIe 6.0 x16 for the NVIDIA part.

API support separates consumer and server positioning. The RX 6550S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, with display outputs marked as portable device dependent. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, and has no display outputs. The NVIDIA part is not a graphics card in the traditional sense; it is a compute accelerator with no rendering pipeline.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6550S wins in any scenario requiring traditional graphics output. It supports modern graphics APIs, has display outputs, and delivers a pixel rate of 76.80 GPixel/s that exceeds the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s. Its 50 W power envelope allows deployment in thin, portable form factors where the 1000 W B200 SXM6 cannot physically operate. The AMD part also wins on clock speed: its 2000 MHz base and 2400 MHz boost are higher than the B200 SXM6's 120 MHz base and 1830 MHz boost, which matters for latency-sensitive single-threaded workloads that do not scale across thousands of cores.

The B200 SXM6 wins in every throughput-dominated category. Its FP32 output of 69.34 TFLOPS crushes the RX 6550S's 4.915 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 69.34 TFLOPS at 1:1 ratio is more than 7x the RX 6550S's packed FP16 rate. The 592 tensor cores provide specialized matrix math acceleration that the RX 6550S lacks entirely. The 180 GB HBM3e pool with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth enables model sizes and data streaming that the 4 GB GDDR6 buffer cannot approach.

The B200 SXM6 also wins on transistor density, packing 127.8 million transistors per square millimeter versus 50.5 million for the RX 6550S. That density advantage, combined with 208,000 million total transistors, indicates a fundamentally more complex and capable compute engine.

For workloads that mix graphics and compute, the RX 6550S retains an edge in pixel output and API compatibility. For workloads that demand raw arithmetic throughput, memory capacity, or tensor operations, the B200 SXM6 dominates. The 1,083.4 GTexel/s texture rate on the NVIDIA part suggests it can process large texture datasets, but the lack of display output and graphics APIs means that capability is not accessible through conventional rendering pipelines.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 delivers 69.34 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, which is 14.1x higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6550S's 4.915 TFLOPS.

Q: What memory capacity and bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The RX 6550S has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB of HBM3e on an 8192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, which is 45x more capacity and 64x more bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU supports modern graphics APIs?

A: The RX 6550S supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, indicating it has no graphics API support.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The RX 6550S has a 50 W TDP with no power connectors. The B200 SXM6 has a 1000 W TDP and requires a 1400 W suggested PSU. The RX 6550S is 20x lower in thermal design power.

Q: What are the physical form factors?

A: The RX 6550S is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a slot width of IGP. The B200 SXM6 is an SXM module with a slot width of SXM Module. The RX 6550S uses PCIe 4.0 x4, while the B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16.

Q: Which GPU has tensor cores?

A: Only the B200 SXM6 has tensor cores, with 592 of them. The RX 6550S has no tensor cores, instead featuring 16 ray accelerators for ray tracing workloads.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows two devices that occupy separate performance domains. The AMD Radeon RX 6550S is a 50 W integrated graphics solution with 4 GB of memory, a 64-bit bus, and full support for consumer graphics APIs. It achieves 4.915 TFLOPS FP32 and 76.80 GPixel/s, with a 2400 MHz boost clock. This part belongs in portable systems where low power consumption and display output are mandatory.

The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 is a 1000 W server accelerator with 18,944 shading units, 592 tensor cores, and 180 GB of HBM3e across an 8192-bit interface. It delivers 69.34 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, with 1,083.4 GTexel/s texture throughput. It has no display outputs and no graphics API support. This part belongs in data centers where massive parallel compute and memory bandwidth are the only priorities.

The RX 6550S wins where pixel rate, API compatibility, clock speed, and power efficiency matter. The B200 SXM6 wins where shader count, tensor operations, memory capacity, memory bandwidth, and raw FP32/FP16 throughput matter. The pixel rate comparison is the only metric where the AMD part leads the NVIDIA part, at 76.80 GPixel/s versus 43.92 GPixel/s.

The B200 SXM6 carries a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD. The RX 6550S has no recorded launch MSRP. Neither product has benchmark scores in the database, so all conclusions derive from specification analysis. The 50th percentile ranking for both parts reflects the database's classification method, not measured performance equivalence.

For traditional graphics rendering, the RX 6550S is the only viable choice given its API support and display outputs. For compute workloads that require tensor cores, high FP16 throughput, or memory capacities beyond 4 GB, the B200 SXM6 is the only viable choice given the RX 6550S lacks tensor cores entirely and has minimal memory. The two products do not compete in any overlapping workload segment.