AMD Radeon RX 6700M vs NVIDIA GeForce MX550 Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data shows a complete sweep for the AMD Radeon RX 6700M in the two shared benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6700M scores 77,666 against the MX550's 20,372 — a 73.8% advantage for the AMD part. That is not a marginal lead; it is a generational gap in raw compute throughput. The NVIDIA GeForce MX550 simply cannot keep pace in this workload, and the delta is so large that no driver optimization or thermal headroom could close it.

The Vulkan results tell the same story, though with a slightly smaller gap. The RX 6700M posts 90,816 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the MX550 manages 32,469. The AMD card leads by 64.2% here. Vulkan tends to scale with shading units and memory bandwidth, both of which heavily favor the RX 6700M. The MX550's 1,024 shading units and 64-bit memory bus are outclassed by the RX 6700M's 2,304 shading units and 160-bit bus. These are not subtle differences; they are structural advantages that show up in every frame.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the RX 6700M also has a substantial library of additional tests. Its PassMark G3D score is 13,536, and it reaches 91,911 in Geekbench Metal — numbers the MX550 cannot approach because it lacks Metal support entirely in this dataset. The RX 6700M's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 1,845 further reinforces its DirectX 12 Ultimate capabilities, a feature set the MX550 does not offer.

The MX550's only numerical bright spot is its average benchmark score of 26,421 versus the RX 6700M's 25,633. That difference is less than 3%, and it is driven by the MX550 having fewer benchmark entries — only two tests pull up its average, while the RX 6700M's average is diluted by a wider range of workloads, including low-level PassMark DX9 and DX10 tests where scores like 155 and 92 drag the mean down. In the tests where both parts appear, the RX 6700M wins decisively.

# The Verdict

If the benchmark data is your only guide, the AMD Radeon RX 6700M is the clear choice for any workload that stresses GPU compute. It is 73.8% ahead in OpenCL and 64.2% ahead in Vulkan. Those are not rounding errors. The MX550 is a low-power part designed for thin-and-light laptops, and its 25 W TDP reflects that. The RX 6700M, at 135 W, is in a different performance class entirely.

Who should pick the MX550? The data supports it only for users who prioritize power efficiency over performance. At 25 W versus 135 W, the MX550 draws a fraction of the power. If you need a dGPU for basic acceleration in a portable chassis and never push heavy compute, the MX550's 72nd percentile ranking among all GPUs is respectable. But that percentile is based on a narrow benchmark set, and the average score of 26,421 is inflated by its two strong results.

Who should pick the RX 6700M? Anyone running Vulkan-based games, OpenCL compute, or DirectX 12 Ultimate workloads. Its 71st percentile ranking is comparable to the MX550's 72nd, but the actual performance ceiling is far higher. The RX 6700M sits within 0.4% of the RTX 3080 Ti Mobile in average score, per the nearestRivals data, which puts it in serious mobile gaming territory. The MX550's nearest rivals include the RTX 5060 at 0.3% delta and the RX 5700 XT 50th Anniversary at -0.5%, which shows it competes with older desktop cards — but those are still far below the RX 6700M's absolute scores.

The verdict is straightforward: for raw performance, the RX 6700M wins every benchmark where they both appear, and does so by margins that make the MX550 unsuitable for demanding workloads. The MX550 is only defensible for ultra-low-power use cases where its 25 W TDP is a hard requirement.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The MX550 uses NVIDIA's Turing architecture on a 12 nm TSMC process, with 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die. The RX 6700M uses AMD's RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm TSMC process, packing 17,200 million transistors into a 335 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story: 23.5 million transistors per mm² for the MX550 versus 51.3 million per mm² for the RX 6700M. The 7 nm node gives AMD a density advantage of over 2x, which directly translates into more shading units, more TMUs, and more ROPs in the same physical footprint.

The chip designs differ fundamentally. The MX550 is built on the TU117SB chip, a small Turing die. The RX 6700M uses Navi 22, a much larger RDNA 2.0 chip. The shading unit count is more than double on the AMD side: 2,304 versus 1,024. TMUs are 144 versus 32, and ROPs are 64 versus 16. These are not incremental differences; they are 4.5x and 4x advantages, respectively, for the RX 6700M in texture and pixel throughput.

Feature support also diverges. The RX 6700M includes 36 ray tracing cores, while the MX550 has none. The AMD card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MX550 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, so those APIs are a wash. The RX 6700M also has a 2:1 FP16 rate, delivering 22.12 TFLOPS FP16 versus 11.06 TFLOPS FP32, while the MX550 runs FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, both at 2.703 TFLOPS. For mixed-precision workloads, the RX 6700M is in a different league.

Memory architecture is another major split. The MX550 uses 2 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6700M uses 10 GB GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus, delivering 320.0 GB/s — over 3.3x the bandwidth. The clock speeds also favor AMD: the RX 6700M boosts to 2400 MHz with a base of 1489 MHz, while the MX550 boosts to 1320 MHz from a 1065 MHz base. The RX 6700M even has a separate game clock of 2300 MHz, which the MX550 lacks entirely.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance in FP32?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6700M delivers 11.06 TFLOPS FP32, which is 4.1x the MX550's 2.703 TFLOPS. This is the most direct measure of general-purpose compute capability.

Q: Do both GPUs support ray tracing?

A: No. The RX 6700M has 36 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate. The MX550 has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1), which does not include the full ray tracing feature set.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU have?

A: The RX 6700M has 320.0 GB/s from its 160-bit bus and 10 GB of GDDR6. The MX550 has 96.00 GB/s from a 64-bit bus and 2 GB of GDDR6. The AMD part has over 3.3x the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU is more power-efficient based on TDP?

A: The MX550 has a 25 W TDP compared to the RX 6700M's 135 W. The MX550 uses 18.5% of the power of the RX 6700M, making it far more suitable for ultra-portable designs.

Q: Are there benchmark tests where the MX550 wins?

A: In the head-to-head dataset, the MX550 wins zero tests. The RX 6700M wins both Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The MX550's higher average benchmark score (26,421 vs 25,633) is an artifact of having only two benchmarks in its dataset.

Q: What is the manufacturing process difference?

A: The MX550 is built on TSMC's 12 nm process, while the RX 6700M uses TSMC's 7 nm process. The 7 nm node enables 51.3 million transistors per mm² versus 23.5 million per mm² on 12 nm.

# Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce MX550 wins on power efficiency and portability. The 25 W TDP is the defining advantage. This is a GPU that can be integrated into thin-and-light laptops without requiring active cooling that adds bulk. The 12 nm process is older, but the low power envelope means the MX550 can run in systems where the RX 6700M's 135 W TDP would be impossible. For basic tasks like video playback, light photo editing, or driving an external display, the MX550's 2 GB GDDR6 and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth are sufficient. Its 72nd percentile ranking shows it is not a weak GPU overall — it just loses badly to the RX 6700M in absolute terms.

AMD Radeon RX 6700M wins on every performance metric that matters. The 73.8% lead in OpenCL and 64.2% lead in Vulkan are the headline numbers. The 10 GB memory capacity and 320.0 GB/s bandwidth make it viable for modern game textures and large compute buffers. The 36 ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support mean it can handle current-generation game features that the MX550 cannot even attempt. The 135 W TDP is a cost, but it buys 11.06 TFLOPS FP32, 153.6 GPixel/s pixel rate, and 345.6 GTexel/s texture rate — all of which are multiples of the MX550's figures.

The use-case split is clear. If you are building or buying a laptop for gaming, 3D rendering, or GPU-accelerated compute, the RX 6700M is the only rational choice from this data. If you need a discrete GPU for office work, media consumption, or light productivity in a slim chassis, the MX550's power draw makes it the practical option. The RX 6700M's nearest rivals include desktop workstation cards like the Radeon Pro W5700 and FirePro D700, which underscores its performance tier. The MX550's rivals are similarly positioned but at a much lower absolute performance level.

One final consideration: the RX 6700M's PassMark results show a mixed bag — 13,536 in G3D but only 92 in DX10 and 65 in DX12. That variance suggests driver-sensitive workloads. The MX550 is not represented in those tests, so no direct comparison exists. But in the two tests where both GPUs appear, the RX 6700M dominates without exception.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce MX550 | AMD Radeon RX 6700M |

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

| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |

| Transistors | 4,700 million | 17,200 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 335 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 51.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1065 MHz | 1489 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1320 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Game Clock | None | 2300 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 10 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 160 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 96.00 GB/s | 320.0 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 2304 |

| TMUs | 32 | 144 |

| ROPs | 16 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 36 |

| Pixel Rate | 21.12 GPixel/s | 153.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 42.24 GTexel/s | 345.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.703 TFLOPS | 11.06 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 2.703 TFLOPS (1:1) | 22.12 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 25 W | 135 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Release Date | 2021-12-16 | 2021-05-30 |

| Predecessor | None | Polaris Mobile |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 26,421 | 25,633 |

| Percentile vs All GPUs | 72 | 71 |