NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M vs NVIDIA RTX A400 Comparison

The data presents a stark generational contrast. The NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M, a 2011 mobile part, is positioned against the NVIDIA RTX A400, a 2024 workstation entry. The benchmark results show a clear performance hierarchy, but the specifications reveal a deeper story about how far GPU architecture has come. The RTX A400 is not just faster; it is fundamentally a different class of product, despite both cards occupying a similar low-power, entry-level space in their respective eras.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark results, the NVIDIA RTX A400 wins in the single head-to-head test available: Geekbench OpenCL, with a score of 22,844 compared to the GT 555M's 6,493. This represents a decisive 71.6% advantage for the newer card. The data shows no benchmark category where the GeForce GT 555M comes out ahead.

However, the data suggests a use-case split beyond raw compute. The RTX A400, being a workstation product, shows a broader benchmark profile in its own results. Its Passmark scores demonstrate specialized strengths: a DirectX 9 score of 87 is its highest API-specific result, while its G2D score of 899 indicates decent 2D desktop performance. The GT 555M, with only a single OpenCL score, appears to have been a more general-purpose mobile part. The RTX A400's architecture includes 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores, which are absent from the older card. This implies the A400 is designed for workloads that leverage ray tracing and AI acceleration, even if the benchmark data provided does not directly test those features. The GT 555M, with its Fermi architecture, has no such specialized hardware, making it a purely rasterization-focused chip. Therefore, the RTX A400 wins in any modern workstation task, while the GT 555M's only potential "win" is as a legacy part for very old software.

FAQ

Q: Is the RTX A400 faster than the GT 555M in the available benchmark?

A: Yes. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A400 scores 22,844, while the GeForce GT 555M scores 6,493. This gives the A400 a 71.6% lead, which is a substantial performance gap.

Q: How does the RTX A400 compare to its closest rivals in the database?

A: The RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6,078. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230, which scores 6,077 (a 0% delta). It is also closely matched with the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6,049, 0.5% ahead) and the AMD Radeon 760M (6,019, 1% ahead).

Q: What is the performance context for the GeForce GT 555M?

A: The GT 555M has an average benchmark score of 6,493, placing it in the 37th percentile of all GPUs. Its closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M, which scores 6,513, making the GT 555M 0.3% slower.

Q: Does the RTX A400 have hardware features that the GT 555M lacks?

A: Yes. The RTX A400 is built on the Ampere architecture and includes 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores. The GeForce GT 555M, based on the older Fermi architecture, has no RT or tensor cores listed in its specifications.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX A400 has a memory bandwidth of 96.00 GB/s, while the GT 555M has a bandwidth of 28.80 GB/s. The A400's advantage comes from its GDDR6 memory, whereas the GT 555M uses DDR3.

Q: Are both GPUs in the same performance percentile ranking?

A: They are close. The GT 555M is in the 37th percentile of all GPUs, while the RTX A400 is in the 35th percentile. Despite the huge gap in raw performance, their percentile rankings are similar, indicating the A400 competes in a different, more modern performance tier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The provided data includes exactly one direct comparison: Geekbench OpenCL. This is the definitive test for raw compute throughput. The NVIDIA RTX A400 scores 22,844, while the NVIDIA GeForce GT 555M scores 6,493. The delta percentage is -71.6% for the A400, which means the A400's score is 71.6% higher than the GT 555M's. This is a massive, multi-generational leap in compute capability.

To put this in perspective, the GT 555M's nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M5000M (6,481) and the AMD Radeon Vega 10 Mobile (6,476). The RTX A400's score of 22,844 is more than three times higher than any of these. The A400's closest competitors are far weaker, such as the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 (6,049). This means that in a compute-heavy workload, the A400 would completely outclass the GT 555M and its contemporaries. The difference is not incremental; it is a step change in performance. The data suggests that the Fermi-based GT 555M is simply out of its depth against the Ampere-based A400 in any modern compute task.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every measurable specification. The most obvious is memory: the GT 555M has 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s. Although the A400 has a narrower bus, its faster memory type gives it over three times the bandwidth.

The shader configuration also diverges significantly. The GT 555M has 144 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 has 768 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The RTX A400 has more than five times the shading units, though the TMU and ROP counts are identical. This suggests the A400 is designed for massively parallel compute, while the GT 555M has a more balanced, lower-throughput design.

The clock speeds and power characteristics are also distinct. The GT 555M has a memory clock of 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) and a TDP of 35 W. The RTX A400 has a base clock of 1417 MHz, a boost of 1762 MHz, a memory clock of 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), and a TDP of 50 W. The A400's higher TDP and much higher clock speeds contribute to its performance advantage. The bus interface differs as well: the GT 555M uses PCIe 2.0 x16, while the A400 uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The A400's physical design is a single-slot, 163 mm (6.4 inches) low-profile card with 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, while the GT 555M's outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," reflecting its mobile origins.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is monumental. The GeForce GT 555M is built on the Fermi architecture using a 40 nm process at TSMC, with 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die. The RTX A400 is built on the Ampere architecture using an 8 nm process at Samsung, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. This represents a 7.4x increase in transistor count on a smaller die, enabled by a much denser process node (4.9M transistors per mm² vs. 43.5M per mm²).

The core feature sets are entirely different. The Fermi chip (GF106) has no dedicated ray tracing or tensor cores. The Ampere chip (GA107) includes 6 RT cores and 24 tensor cores. This is a fundamental difference in capability. The RTX A400 also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GT 555M only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan support listed. The A400's FP32 compute is rated at 2.706 TFLOPS, with FP16 at 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1), whereas the GT 555M's FP32 is only 339.8 GFLOPS. This is nearly an 8x difference in raw floating-point performance. The GT 555M's pixel rate is 3.540 GPixel/s and texture rate is 14.16 GTexel/s, compared to the A400's 28.19 GPixel/s and 42.29 GTexel/s. The A400 is a modern, feature-rich workstation part, while the GT 555M is a legacy mobile GPU with a feature set frozen in 2011.

The Verdict

The data is unequivocal: the NVIDIA RTX A400 is the superior product in every measurable way. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by a landslide (71.6% in Geekbench OpenCL). It offers a dramatically higher memory bandwidth (96.00 GB/s vs. 28.80 GB/s), a vastly larger shader count (768 vs. 144), and a much higher compute throughput (2.706 TFLOPS vs. 339.8 GFLOPS FP32). For anyone building a modern workstation or needing a low-profile card with current API support, the RTX A400 is the only choice. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, Vulkan 1.4, and hardware ray tracing cores makes it future-proof, whereas the GT 555M is end-of-life.

The GeForce GT 555M's only appeal is as a legacy component. Its 35 W TDP is lower than the A400's 50 W, and it uses an older PCIe 2.0 interface. If a user is maintaining a vintage 2011 laptop and needs a replacement part, the GT 555M is what fits. However, the benchmark percentile data shows both cards are in a similar low tier (37th vs. 35th percentile), but this is misleading. The RTX A400 sits in that percentile because its rivals are modern low-end parts like the GeForce MX230 and Iris Pro 6200, while the GT 555M's rivals are other old mobile chips like the GTX 670M. The A400's raw score is over three times higher. In a straight performance contest, the RTX A400 wins decisively. For any new purchase, the GT 555M is obsolete. The RTX A400 is the clear pick for anyone who needs a working, modern GPU.