NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce MX230 Comparison

NVIDIA’s MX230 and GTX 550 Ti represent two very different eras of GPU design, separated by roughly eight years of architectural evolution. The MX230 is a modern, ultra-low-power Pascal part built for thin-and-light laptops, while the GTX 550 Ti is a Fermi-era desktop card from 2011 with a much higher power draw and a wider memory bus. The benchmark data shows a near-dead heat in raw compute, but the specifications reveal a stark contrast in efficiency, memory configuration, and feature support. This analysis breaks down what the numbers mean for both parts.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 has an average benchmark score of 6077, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti scores 5731. The MX230 is roughly 6% higher in this metric, placing it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs compared to the GTX 550 Ti’s 33rd percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in the only head-to-head benchmark available?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the MX230 scored 5739 against the GTX 550 Ti’s 5731. This results in a 0.1% delta in favor of the MX230, which is effectively a statistical tie.

Q: What is the most significant difference in their memory subsystems?

A: The GTX 550 Ti has a 192-bit memory bus with 1024 MB of GDDR5, delivering 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX230 has a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, providing only 48.06 GB/s. The GTX 550 Ti offers more than double the memory bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU consumes less power according to the data?

A: The MX230 has a TDP of 10 W, whereas the GTX 550 Ti is rated at 116 W. The MX230 is dramatically more power-efficient, though the GTX 550 Ti requires a 300 W suggested PSU and a 6-pin power connector, while the MX230 uses no external power connectors.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same modern APIs?

A: No. The MX230 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 550 Ti supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but has no Vulkan support listed in the data.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The MX230 packs 1,800 million transistors into a 74 mm² die on Samsung’s 14 nm process, yielding a density of 24.3M transistors per mm². The GTX 550 Ti has 1,170 million transistors on a 238 mm² die using TSMC’s 40 nm process, resulting in just 4.9M transistors per mm².

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is enormous. The MX230 is built on the Pascal architecture (chip GP108) using a 14 nm process from Samsung, while the GTX 550 Ti relies on the much older Fermi 2.0 architecture (chip GF116) fabricated on TSMC’s 40 nm node. This process shrink is the primary driver of their divergent characteristics: the MX230 crams 1,800 million transistors into a tiny 74 mm² die, whereas the GTX 550 Ti spreads 1,170 million transistors across a sprawling 238 mm² die.

The transistor density figures are telling — the MX230 achieves 24.3M transistors per mm², which is roughly five times denser than the GTX 550 Ti’s 4.9M per mm². This explains how the newer card can deliver comparable compute performance while consuming only 10 W versus the GTX 550 Ti’s 116 W TDP. Shader organization also differs: the MX230 has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the GTX 550 Ti has 192 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GTX 550 Ti’s higher TMU and ROP counts are a vestige of its wider memory bus and desktop-oriented design.

Memory architecture is another major divergence. The MX230 uses a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5, while the GTX 550 Ti uses a 192-bit bus with just 1024 MB. This yields bandwidth figures of 48.06 GB/s for the MX230 versus 98.50 GB/s for the GTX 550 Ti. In terms of feature support, the MX230 is more modern: it lists Vulkan 1.4 support and DirectX 12 (12_1), whereas the GTX 550 Ti only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0) and lacks Vulkan entirely. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the MX230’s newer architecture clearly offers better forward-looking API compatibility.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct benchmark comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is remarkably close. The MX230 scores 5739, while the GTX 550 Ti scores 5731 — a delta of just 0.1% in favor of the MX230. This is well within noise, meaning that in raw OpenCL compute, the two GPUs are effectively equal. Given the MX230’s 256 shading units versus the GTX 550 Ti’s 192, one might expect the newer card to pull ahead, but the GTX 550 Ti’s higher memory bandwidth (98.50 GB/s) likely compensates for its lower shader count in this workload.

Looking at the average benchmark scores, the MX230’s 6077 sits slightly above the GTX 550 Ti’s 5731, suggesting a modest overall advantage for the Pascal part. The MX230 also holds a higher percentile rank (35th vs. 33rd), indicating it outperforms a slightly larger share of the GPU population. However, the head-to-head data tells a story of near-parity in compute, with the MX230’s edge being marginal. The GTX 550 Ti’s nearest rivals include the GTX 670MX (5721, +0.2%) and AMD Radeon R7 M465 (5841, -1.9%), while the MX230 sits near the RTX A400 (6078, 0%) and Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117, -0.7%). This places both GPUs in a similar performance tier, despite their vastly different architectures and power profiles.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX230 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti |

|----------------|----------------------|---------------------------|

| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm (Samsung) | 40 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 1,800 million | 1,170 million |

| Die Size | 74 mm² | 238 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 24.3M / mm² | 4.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1519 MHz | null |

| Boost Clock | 1531 MHz | null |

| Memory Clock | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) | 1026 MHz (4.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Bus | 64 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 48.06 GB/s | 98.50 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 256 | 192 |

| TMUs | 16 | 32 |

| ROPs | 16 | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 24.50 GPixel/s | 7.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 24.50 GTexel/s | 28.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 783.9 GFLOPS | 691.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 12.25 GFLOPS (1:64) | null |

| TDP | 10 W | 116 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 300 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | null |

| Release Date | 2019-02-20 | 2011-03-14 |

| Launch MSRP | null | 149 USD |

| Length | null | 210 mm (8.3 inches) |

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two GPUs that achieve similar compute results through radically different means. The MX230 wins the overall benchmark comparison, albeit narrowly, with an average score of 6077 versus 5731 and a 35th versus 33rd percentile ranking. In the direct OpenCL test, the MX230 edges out the GTX 550 Ti by 0.1%, which is negligible in real-world terms. However, the MX230 is the clear winner in efficiency and modern feature support — its 10 W TDP is a fraction of the GTX 550 Ti’s 116 W, and it supports Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1), which the older card cannot match.

The GTX 550 Ti does hold one significant advantage: memory bandwidth. Its 98.50 GB/s is more than double the MX230’s 48.06 GB/s, which could matter in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. It also has a higher texture rate (28.80 GTexel/s vs. 24.50 GTexel/s) and more ROPs (24 vs. 16), suggesting better fill-rate performance in certain scenarios. Yet, these advantages come at the cost of a dual-slot form factor, a 6-pin power connector, and a 300 W suggested PSU, making it a relic of desktop computing. The MX230’s integrated form factor, portable-device-dependent outputs, and PCIe 3.0 x4 interface position it as a laptop-oriented part, where power efficiency is paramount.

Where Each One Wins

The MX230 is the pick for scenarios prioritizing power efficiency, portability, and modern software support. Its 10 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops with no external power connectors, and its Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) support ensure compatibility with contemporary APIs. The FP32 compute of 783.9 GFLOPS slightly exceeds the GTX 550 Ti’s 691.2 GFLOPS, giving it a marginal edge in general-purpose compute tasks. Its higher pixel rate (24.50 GPixel/s vs. 7.200 GPixel/s) also suggests better performance in pixel-bound workloads, despite the lower memory bandwidth.

The GTX 550 Ti wins in memory-intensive and fill-rate-bound tasks. Its 192-bit bus delivers 98.50 GB/s of bandwidth, which is crucial for high-resolution textures and heavy data movement. The higher TMU count (32 vs. 16) and ROP count (24 vs. 16) give it a texture rate of 28.80 GTexel/s and better rasterization throughput. It also has a wider bus interface (PCIe 2.0 x16 vs. PCIe 3.0 x4), which could reduce data transfer bottlenecks in desktop systems. For users with legacy software that relies on DVI or mini-HDMI outputs, the GTX 550 Ti’s display connectivity is more conventional, though it requires a dual-slot chassis and a 300 W PSU. Ultimately, the MX230 is the future-proof choice for efficiency and compatibility, while the GTX 550 Ti remains functional for bandwidth-hungry legacy workloads.