Intel Arc B580 vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains two shared benchmark tests between the NVIDIA GeForce MX550 and the Intel Arc B580, and the results are emphatic in both cases. In Geekbench OpenCL, the MX550 scores 20,372, while the Arc B580 scores 92,821, a delta of -78.1% from the perspective of the NVIDIA part. This is not a marginal gap; the Intel GPU delivers roughly 4.5 times the raw compute throughput in this test, which aligns with the enormous specification disparity in shading units, memory bandwidth, and FP32 throughput.

The second shared test, Geekbench Vulkan, tells a similar story. The MX550 posts 32,469, while the Arc B580 reaches 109,672, a delta of -70.4%. The Vulkan result narrows the relative gap slightly compared to OpenCL, but the Arc B580 still holds a commanding lead, outperforming the MX550 by a factor of more than 3.4. These two tests are the only head-to-head data points in the database, so the overall win tally is decisive: the Arc B580 wins 2, the MX550 wins 0.

Context from the nearest rivals helps interpret where each card sits. The MX550 has an average benchmark score of 26,421, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all GPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon 860M (26,401, a 0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, a 0.3% delta), and the AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, a -0.5% delta). These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating the MX550 is clustered tightly with those parts in aggregate scoring. The NVIDIA RTX A4000 is the furthest of its listed rivals at 26,683, a -1% delta.

The Arc B580, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 23,021, which puts it in the 68th percentile, four points lower than the MX550's percentile. Its nearest rivals show a similarly tight cluster: the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061, a -0.2% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22,895, a 0.6% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (23,172, a -0.7% delta), and the NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, a -1% delta). The interesting wrinkle here is that despite losing both head-to-head tests, the MX550 has a higher average score across all its recorded benchmarks than the Arc B580. This occurs because the MX550's average is computed from only two tests, both of which are Geekbench workloads, while the Arc B580's average includes a much broader benchmark suite with additional tests such as Passmark DirectX 9, 10, 11, 12, G2D, G3D, and GPU compute, plus 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. The Arc B580's Passmark scores are relatively modest: 76 in DirectX 10, 128 in DirectX 11, 76 in DirectX 12, 183 in DirectX 9, 709 in G2D, 15,748 in G3D, and 7,729 in GPU compute. These lower individual Passmark results drag down its average, even though its Geekbench results are far superior.

This discrepancy highlights the importance of workload selection. In the two directly comparable workloads, the Arc B580 is overwhelmingly faster. The MX550's higher aggregate average is a statistical artifact of having fewer, higher-scoring tests per workload type, not evidence of real-world competitiveness in compute-heavy tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the shared benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Arc B580 wins both head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 92,821 versus the MX550's 20,372 (-78.1% delta). In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 109,672 versus 32,469 (-70.4% delta).

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 has an average benchmark score of 26,421, while the Intel Arc B580 has an average of 23,021. The MX550 sits at the 72nd percentile of all GPUs, and the Arc B580 sits at the 68th percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card?

A: The MX550's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon 860M (26,401, 0.1% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, 0.3% delta), AMD Radeon RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary (26,553, -0.5% delta), and NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683, -1% delta). The Arc B580's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 580 2048SP (23,061, -0.2% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 (22,895, 0.6% delta), NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 (23,172, -0.7% delta), and NVIDIA P106-100 (23,249, -1% delta).

Q: Why does the MX550 have a higher average score if it loses both head-to-head tests?

A: The MX550's average is based on only two Geekbench tests, both of which produce relatively high scores per test. The Arc B580's average incorporates ten tests, including several Passmark workloads with lower scores, which lowers its aggregate despite its much higher Geekbench results.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each card?

A: The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, with 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth. The Arc B580 has 12 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 192-bit bus, with 456.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 is listed as end-of-life, released on 2021-12-16. The Intel Arc B580 is listed as active, released on 2024-12-12, with a predecessor named Alchemist.

Where Each One Wins

The Arc B580 wins in every directly comparable workload in the database. In Geekbench OpenCL, its compute advantage is massive, and in Geekbench Vulkan, its graphics and compute pipeline also dominates. For any user running OpenCL or Vulkan workloads, the data points entirely to the Intel part.

The MX550, however, holds a higher aggregate average score and a higher percentile ranking. This suggests that in the specific set of tests used to compute its average, it performs proportionally better than the Arc B580 does in its own broader test set. The MX550's percentile of 72 versus the Arc B580's 68 indicates that the MX550 ranks higher relative to all other GPUs in the database, even though it loses the direct comparisons.

For compute-heavy tasks such as OpenCL-based processing, the Arc B580 is the clear choice. Its 92,821 OpenCL score dwarfs the MX550's 20,372. For Vulkan-based rendering or compute, the Arc B580 again leads decisively. The MX550's niche would be limited to scenarios where its lower power envelope, 25 W TDP versus the Arc B580's 190 W TDP, is the primary constraint, and where the workload is light enough that the MX550's smaller resources suffice. The MX550's integrated form factor (IGP slot width, no power connectors) also makes it suitable for compact or low-power systems, whereas the Arc B580 requires a dual-slot layout, a 1x 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W power supply.

The Passmark results for the Arc B580 offer some insight into its behavior across older API workloads: DirectX 9 scores 183, DirectX 10 scores 76, DirectX 11 scores 128, and DirectX 12 scores 76. These are not comparative wins against the MX550, as no MX550 Passmark data exists, but they do show that the Arc B580's performance varies substantially by API generation. Its strongest Passmark result is in G3D at 15,748, with GPU compute at 7,729, indicating that its compute and 3D rendering capabilities are far stronger than its legacy API performance.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ dramatically across nearly every specification category. The MX550 uses the TU117SB chip on the Turing architecture, while the Arc B580 uses the BMG-G21 chip on the Xe2-HPG architecture. The MX550 is fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC, whereas the Arc B580 uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Transistor counts differ sharply: the MX550 has 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, while the Arc B580 has 19,600 million transistors on a 272 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 23.5M per mm² for the MX550 and 72.1M per mm² for the Arc B580.

Clock speeds show the Arc B580 running much higher, with a base and boost of 2670 MHz, versus the MX550's base of 1065 MHz and boost of 1320 MHz. Memory configurations are also far apart: the MX550 offers 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 96.00 GB/s bandwidth, while the Arc B580 offers 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 456.0 GB/s bandwidth. The MX550's memory runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the Arc B580's memory runs at 2375 MHz with 19 Gbps effective.

Core counts differ by a wide margin. The MX550 has 1,024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, with no RT cores listed. The Arc B580 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 80 ROPs, with 20 RT cores. Pixel rate for the MX550 is 21.12 GPixel/s, versus 213.6 GPixel/s for the Arc B580. Texture rate is 42.24 GTexel/s versus 427.2 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 2.703 TFLOPS for the MX550 and 13.67 TFLOPS for the Arc B580. FP16 throughput is 2.703 TFLOPS (1:1) for the MX550 and 27.34 TFLOPS (2:1) for the Arc B580.

Power and physical requirements also diverge. The MX550 has a TDP of 25 W, is listed as IGP slot width, and has no power connectors. The Arc B580 has a TDP of 190 W, is dual-slot, uses a 1x 8-pin power connector, and a suggested 450 W power supply. The MX550 measures no listed dimensions, while the Arc B580 measures 272 mm in length, 115 mm in height, and 45 mm in width. Display outputs differ as well: the MX550 is listed as portable device dependent, while the Arc B580 provides 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. Both use PCIe 4.0 x8.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two products is substantial. The MX550 is built on NVIDIA's Turing architecture, which dates to an earlier generation and is fabricated on TSMC's 12 nm node. It has no dedicated RT cores and no tensor cores listed in the database. Its FP16 performance matches its FP32 at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not gain any throughput advantage in half-precision workloads.

The Arc B580 uses Intel's Xe2-HPG architecture, part of the Battlemage generation, and is built on TSMC's 5 nm node. It includes 20 dedicated RT cores, which the MX550 lacks entirely. Its FP16 throughput is double its FP32 at 27.34 TFLOPS versus 13.67 TFLOPS, indicating a 2:1 ratio that allows faster half-precision computation. The Arc B580 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the MX550 supports only DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The transistor density difference highlights the architectural evolution: the Arc B580 packs 72.1M transistors per mm², more than three times the MX550's 23.5M per mm². This density, combined with the larger die and higher clock speeds, explains the Arc B580's dominance in compute throughput. The MX550's older process and smaller chip limit its capacity for parallel work, while the Arc B580's modern design enables a much larger shader array and higher memory bandwidth.

The MX550 is listed as end-of-life, while the Arc B580 is active and has a predecessor named Alchemist. The MX550 has no predecessor listed.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Arc B580 wins every head-to-head benchmark in the database. In Geekbench OpenCL, it outperforms the MX550 by 78.1%, and in Geekbench Vulkan, by 70.4%. Its memory subsystem is far superior: 12 GB versus 2 GB, a 192-bit bus versus 64-bit, and 456.0 GB/s versus 96.00 GB/s. Its shading units, TMUs, ROPs, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput are all multiples of the MX550's figures. It also adds 20 RT cores and more than doubles FP16 throughput with a 2:1 ratio.

The MX550, however, has a higher average benchmark score (26,421 versus 23,021) and a higher percentile ranking (72 versus 68). This means that within the database's full scoring context, the MX550 ranks above the Arc B580 relative to all GPUs, even though it loses the direct comparisons. This is a consequence of the different test sets available for each card, but it is still a meaningful data point for anyone comparing aggregate scores.

The Arc B580 is the appropriate choice for any workload that stresses compute, memory bandwidth, or Vulkan/OpenCL performance. The MX550 is the appropriate choice for systems with strict power limits, given its 25 W TDP, integrated form factor, and lack of power connectors. It is also the only one of the two that is portable device dependent in its display outputs, which aligns with its likely use in thin laptops. The Arc B580, with its dual-slot design, 1x 8-pin power connector, and suggested 450 W power supply, is a desktop-oriented part.

For users who prioritize raw performance in shared benchmarks, the Arc B580 is the only logical pick. For users who prioritize ranking within the database or low-power integration, the MX550 has its place, but the performance gap in the head-to-head tests is so large that any compute-intensive use case points firmly to the Intel GPU.