AMD Radeon RX 6550M vs NVIDIA B200 SXM6 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon RX 6550M and the NVIDIA B200 SXM6. The database lists two benchmark results for the RX 6550M, with a Geekbench OpenCL score of 42,536 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 50,867. Its average benchmark score across recorded tests is 46,702. The B200 SXM6 has no benchmark entries in the database, resulting in an average benchmark score of 0 and a null comparison set. Consequently, the head-to-head section is defined by the absence of overlapping test data rather than by competitive measurements.

The RX 6550M sits at the 85th percentile among all GPUs in the database, which places it above the median performer. Its nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Arc A530M with an average score of 46,614, a delta of 0.2 percent; the AMD Radeon RX 5600M at 46,601, also a 0.2 percent delta; the NVIDIA RTX A2000 at 46,043, a 1.4 percent delta; and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45,972, a 1.6 percent delta. These deltas indicate that the RX 6550M outperforms each of these four rivals by a narrow margin, ranging from 0.2 percent against the Arc A530M and RX 5600M to 1.6 percent against the RTX 5880 Ada Generation. The B200 SXM6 holds the 50th percentile among all GPUs, but with no benchmark scores recorded, this percentile reflects the absence of data rather than measured performance.

The two available RX 6550M scores show a notable gap between API-specific tests. The Vulkan result of 50,867 exceeds the OpenCL result of 42,536 by roughly 19.6 percent, indicating that the architecture delivers stronger performance under the Vulkan API in the recorded workload. Because the B200 SXM6 has no corresponding entries, no cross-product comparison can be made for either API.

The average benchmark score of 46,702 for the RX 6550M is 0.2 percent higher than the Arc A530M's 46,614, a difference of 88 points. Against the RX 5600M, the advantage is 101 points. The margin over the RTX A2000 is 659 points, and over the RTX 5880 Ada Generation it is 730 points. These are small absolute differences, so the RX 6550M's position among its nearest rivals is tightly clustered rather than dominant.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46,702, while the NVIDIA B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmark scores, giving it an average of 0.

Q: What are the recorded benchmark scores for the RX 6550M?

A: The RX 6550M scores 42,536 in Geekbench OpenCL and 50,867 in Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: How does the RX 6550M compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RX 6550M leads the Intel Arc A530M by 0.2 percent, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M by 0.2 percent, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 by 1.4 percent, and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation by 1.6 percent in average benchmark score.

Q: Does the B200 SXM6 have any benchmark results?

A: No, the B200 SXM6 has an empty benchmarks list, resulting in an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals.

Q: What is the percentile ranking for each GPU?

A: The RX 6550M is at the 85th percentile among all GPUs, while the B200 SXM6 is at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The B200 SXM6 has a transistor density of 127.8M per mm², while the RX 6550M has 50.5M per mm².

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and target different segments. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M belongs to the Radeon RX 6000 series and uses the Navi 24 chip built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture. Its generation is listed as Navi Mobile (RX 6000M), so it is a mobile-oriented part. The NVIDIA B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip built on the Blackwell architecture and belongs to the Server Blackwell (Bxx) generation, indicating a server-class design.

The process nodes differ. The RX 6550M is fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the B200 SXM6 uses a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Transistor counts diverge sharply: the RX 6550M contains 5,400 million transistors on a 107 mm² die, whereas the B200 SXM6 contains 208,000 million transistors on a 1,628 mm² die. The transistor density for the RX 6550M is 50.5M per mm², and for the B200 SXM6 it is 127.8M per mm².

Core configurations differ fundamentally. The RX 6550M has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores. It has no tensor cores listed. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores, with no ray tracing cores listed. This makes the B200 SXM6 a tensor-heavy design, consistent with its server positioning, while the RX 6550M includes dedicated ray tracing hardware.

Memory subsystems are also distinct. The RX 6550M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 uses 180 GB of HBM3e memory on an 8,192-bit bus, delivering 8.19 TB/s of bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and a boost clock of 1,830 MHz, while the RX 6550M has a base clock of 2,000 MHz, a boost clock of 2,840 MHz, and a game clock of 2,560 MHz. The memory clock for the RX 6550M is 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective, while the B200 SXM6 lists 2,000 MHz with 8 Gbps effective.

API support differs completely. The RX 6550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan, reflecting its lack of display-oriented graphics APIs. The RX 6550M has display outputs listed as Portable Device Dependent, while the B200 SXM6 has no outputs. The RX 6550M uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 bus interface, while the B200 SXM6 uses PCIe 6.0 x16.

Power characteristics differ as well. The RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W, is an integrated graphics package (IGP) with no power connectors, and requires no suggested PSU. The B200 SXM6 has a TDP of 1,000 W, is an SXM Module, and has a suggested PSU of 1,400 W.

The Verdict

The data indicates that these two GPUs are not direct competitors. The RX 6550M has recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 85th percentile, with an average score of 46,702. The B200 SXM6 has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile with an average score of 0. For any workload represented by the database's benchmark suite, the RX 6550M is the only one of the two with measurable performance.

The B200 SXM6 is defined by its server specifications: 180 GB of HBM3e memory, 8.19 TB/s bandwidth, 592 tensor cores, 69.34 TFLOPS FP32, and a 1,000 W TDP. The RX 6550M is a mobile part with 4 GB GDDR6, 144.0 GB/s bandwidth, 16 ray tracing cores, 5.816 TFLOPS FP32, and an 80 W TDP. The RX 6550M supports graphics APIs and has display outputs, while the B200 SXM6 has no display outputs and no DirectX, OpenGL, or Vulkan support.

The recorded data supports selecting the RX 6550M for any scenario where benchmark-verified graphics performance is required. The B200 SXM6 cannot be evaluated through the database's benchmark results, so its suitability must be inferred from its server-oriented specifications alone. The B200 SXM6 has a launch MSRP of 34,999 USD. The RX 6550M has no launch MSRP listed.

The production status for both is Active. The RX 6550M was released on 2023-01-03, and the B200 SXM6 was released on 2024-10-31. The RX 6550M's predecessor is Polaris Mobile, while the B200 SXM6's predecessor is Server Hopper. The B200 SXM6 lists a successor, Server Rubin, while the RX 6550M lists none.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification field. The RX 6550M uses the Navi 24 chip on RDNA 2.0, while the B200 SXM6 uses the GB100 chip on Blackwell. The process node is 6 nm for the RX 6550M and 5 nm for the B200 SXM6, both at TSMC. Transistors are 5,400 million versus 208,000 million, and die size is 107 mm² versus 1,628 mm².

Clock speeds differ. The RX 6550M has a base clock of 2,000 MHz, boost of 2,840 MHz, and game clock of 2,560 MHz. The B200 SXM6 has a base clock of 120 MHz and boost of 1,830 MHz, with no game clock listed. Memory clocks are 2,250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) for the RX 6550M and 2,000 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the B200 SXM6.

Memory capacity, type, bus width, and bandwidth all differ. The RX 6550M has 4 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth. The B200 SXM6 has 180 GB HBM3e on an 8,192-bit bus with 8.19 TB/s bandwidth.

Core counts differ. The RX 6550M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, 32 ROPs, and 16 ray tracing cores, with no tensor cores. The B200 SXM6 has 18,944 shading units, 592 TMUs, 24 ROPs, and 592 tensor cores, with no ray tracing cores.

Rates and compute figures differ. The RX 6550M has a pixel rate of 90.88 GPixel/s, texture rate of 181.8 GTexel/s, FP32 of 5.816 TFLOPS, and FP16 of 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1). The B200 SXM6 has a pixel rate of 43.92 GPixel/s, texture rate of 1,083.4 GTexel/s, FP32 of 69.34 TFLOPS, and FP16 of 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1).

Power and form factor differ. The RX 6550M has 80 W TDP, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The B200 SXM6 has 1,000 W TDP, SXM Module slot width, and a suggested PSU of 1,400 W. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x4 for the RX 6550M and PCIe 6.0 x16 for the B200 SXM6. Display outputs are Portable Device Dependent for the RX 6550M and No outputs for the B200 SXM6.

API support differs. The RX 6550M lists DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The B200 SXM6 lists N/A for all three. Release dates are 2023-01-03 for the RX 6550M and 2024-10-31 for the B200 SXM6.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6550M wins in any benchmark-based comparison because it is the only one of the two with recorded scores. Its Geekbench Vulkan score of 50,867 is higher than its Geekbench OpenCL score of 42,536, so Vulkan workloads appear to be the stronger area for this GPU. It also leads its nearest rivals by 0.2 to 1.6 percent in average benchmark score, so it holds a narrow competitive edge within its immediate peer group.

The RX 6550M also wins on graphics-specific features. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, and it includes 16 ray tracing cores. Its pixel rate of 90.88 GPixel/s exceeds the B200 SXM6's 43.92 GPixel/s, and its boost clock of 2,840 MHz is substantially higher than the B200 SXM6's 1,830 MHz. These factors make the RX 6550M the appropriate choice for client-side graphics rendering tasks where the database records performance.

The B200 SXM6 wins on raw compute resources. It has 18,944 shading units versus 1,024, 592 tensor cores versus none, and FP32 of 69.34 TFLOPS versus 5.816 TFLOPS. Its FP16 output of 69.34 TFLOPS (1:1) is higher than the RX 6550M's 11.63 TFLOPS (2:1). Texture rate favors the B200 SXM6 at 1,083.4 GTexel/s versus 181.8 GTexel/s. Memory capacity and bandwidth also favor the B200 SXM6: 180 GB and 8.19 TB/s versus 4 GB and 144.0 GB/s.

The B200 SXM6 also wins on memory bandwidth per the recorded data, with 8.19 TB/s compared to 144.0 GB/s. Its tensor core count of 592 gives it a clear advantage for tensor-oriented workloads. Its transistor count of 208,000 million and die size of 1,628 mm² indicate a much larger compute-focused design. The B200 SXM6's 5 nm process node is smaller than the RX 6550M's 6 nm node, and its transistor density of 127.8M per mm² exceeds the RX 6550M's 50.5M per mm².

The RX 6550M wins on power efficiency per the recorded TDP figures, with 80 W versus 1,000 W. It also wins on portability, as it is an IGP with no power connectors, while the B200 SXM6 is an SXM Module with a suggested PSU of 1,400 W. The RX 6550M's PCIe 4.0 x4 interface is older than the B200 SXM6's PCIe 6.0 x16, but the RX 6550M is the only one with display outputs listed as Portable Device Dependent. The B200 SXM6 has no display outputs.

In summary, the RX 6550M is the only part with measured benchmark performance, graphics API support, and ray tracing cores. The B200 SXM6 is the part with the larger memory pool, higher compute throughput, and tensor core support. The recorded data does not place them in the same performance class.