NVIDIA GeForce MX550 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 and NVIDIA GeForce MX550 occupy opposite ends of the GPU spectrum, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm. In the two shared tests, the RTX 3090 wins decisively: it scores 172,758 in Geekbench OpenCL against the MX550's 20,372, a 748% delta, and 53,927 in Geekbench Vulkan against 32,469, a 66.1% delta. The RTX 3090 also holds a perfect 2-0 win record in head-to-head benchmarks, while the MX550 has zero wins. These are not close contests; they are different product categories entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL result is the starkest separation between the two cards. The RTX 3090's score of 172,758 is more than eight times the MX550's 20,372. That 748% delta represents a fundamental gap in raw compute throughput, driven by the RTX 3090's 10,496 shading units versus the MX550's 1,024. For compute-heavy workloads that scale with shader count, the RTX 3090 is in a different league entirely.

The Geekbench Vulkan test narrows the gap somewhat but still shows a clear winner. The RTX 3090 posts 53,927, while the MX550 manages 32,469. The 66.1% delta is substantial, though less extreme than the OpenCL result. Vulkan's lower-level API overhead likely benefits the MX550's architecture relative to OpenCL, but the RTX 3090's sheer hardware advantage — 328 texture mapping units against 32, and 112 raster output pipelines against 16 — still asserts dominance.

Looking at the broader benchmark picture, the RTX 3090's average benchmark score is 27,565, which places it in the 73rd percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 7800M (average score 27,883, a 1.1% delta against the RTX 3090) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 20 (27,839, a 1% delta). The MX550's average benchmark score of 26,421 puts it in the 72nd percentile, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon 860M at 26,401 (a 0.1% delta). Interestingly, despite the massive head-to-head deltas, both cards sit within one percentile point of each other globally — a reminder that percentile rankings are relative to vastly different GPU populations.

The RTX 3090's individual benchmark results show its strengths: a Passmark G3D score of 26,645, a Passmark GPU Compute score of 15,356, and a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 5,118. The MX550 lacks these specific test entries, so direct comparisons are limited to the two Geekbench tests. What the data does show is that the RTX 3090's average benchmark score (27,565) is pulled down by weaker legacy tests — its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 268 and DirectX 10 score of 182 are low relative to its modern compute scores, suggesting driver overhead or architectural priorities that favor newer APIs.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is generational and physical. The RTX 3090 uses the GA102 chip on an 8 nm Samsung process, while the MX550 uses the TU117SB chip on a 12 nm TSMC process. The RTX 3090 is built on the Ampere architecture, whereas the MX550 is a Turing product. This means the RTX 3090 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the MX550 only reaches DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

The physical scale difference is enormous. The RTX 3090's GA102 die measures 628 mm² and contains 28,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per mm². The MX550's TU117SB die is 200 mm² with 4,700 million transistors, a density of 23.5 million per mm². The RTX 3090 has nearly six times the transistors on roughly three times the die area.

Memory architecture shows a similar gulf. The RTX 3090 carries 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus, delivering 936.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The MX550 has 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, providing 96.00 GB/s. That is a 10x bandwidth advantage for the RTX 3090. The RTX 3090 also features 82 ray tracing cores and 328 tensor cores; the MX550 has none of either. The MX550's 1,024 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs compare to the RTX 3090's 10,496 shading units, 328 TMUs, and 112 ROPs.

Clock speeds tell a more nuanced story. The RTX 3090 runs at a 1395 MHz base and 1695 MHz boost, while the MX550 runs at 1065 MHz base and 1320 MHz boost. The RTX 3090's higher clocks compound its massive shader count advantage. The RTX 3090's memory clock is 1219 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) versus the MX550's 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) — the MX550 actually runs its memory at a higher raw clock, but the RTX 3090's wider bus and GDDR6X type produce far more bandwidth.

Power and physical requirements are equally divergent. The RTX 3090 is rated at 350 W TDP with a triple-slot cooler and a 1x 12-pin power connector, requiring a 750 W suggested PSU. The MX550 is a 25 W IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The RTX 3090 measures 336 mm in length, 140 mm in height, and 61 mm in width; the MX550 has no listed dimensions because it is designed for portable devices where the chassis determines the form factor.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3090 wins in every measured head-to-head benchmark, but the more useful analysis is where each card's architecture gives it a natural home. The RTX 3090's 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores make it suited for ray-traced workloads and AI-accelerated tasks, though no ray tracing benchmark appears in the data. Its 24 GB of GDDR6X memory and 936.2 GB/s bandwidth position it for large datasets and high-resolution textures. Its FP32 throughput of 35.58 TFLOPS (matching its FP16 at a 1:1 ratio) indicates strong compute capability across both precision formats.

The MX550's strengths are not in the head-to-head data but in its physical profile. At 25 W TDP with no power connectors, it can operate in thin-and-light laptops where the RTX 3090's 350 W requirement and triple-slot cooler are impossible. The MX550's 2 GB GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus is modest, but its 2.703 TFLOPS FP32 and FP16 (also 1:1) provide a baseline for portable gaming and light creative work. Its PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while narrower than the RTX 3090's x16, is sufficient for its bandwidth needs.

In terms of API support, the RTX 3090's DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) unlocks features like mesh shaders and variable rate shading that the MX550's DirectX 12 (12_1) cannot access. Both cards support Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6, so cross-API compatibility is equal, but the RTX 3090's newer feature set gives it an advantage in modern game titles that leverage DX12 Ultimate features.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RTX 3090 in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RTX 3090 scores 172,758 versus the MX550's 20,372, a 748% delta that represents roughly an 8.5x performance advantage.

Q: Does the MX550 have ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No. The MX550 (TU117SB, Turing architecture) lists null values for both RT cores and tensor cores, while the RTX 3090 has 82 RT cores and 328 tensor cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 3090 delivers 936.2 GB/s from 24 GB of GDDR6X on a 384-bit bus. The MX550 provides 96.00 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus — a 10x difference.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 3090's 8 nm Samsung process packs 45.1 million transistors per mm², while the MX550's 12 nm TSMC process achieves 23.5 million per mm².

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life in the data. The RTX 3090 was released in 2020 and succeeded by GeForce 40-series; the MX550 was released in 2021 with no listed predecessor or successor.

Q: Can the MX550 match the RTX 3090 in any benchmark?

A: In the two shared tests, no. The RTX 3090 wins both Geekbench OpenCL (748% delta) and Geekbench Vulkan (66.1% delta). The MX550 has zero head-to-head wins.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion for performance: the RTX 3090 is categorically superior to the MX550 in every measurable benchmark. A 748% OpenCL delta and 66.1% Vulkan delta are not incremental improvements — they represent different performance classes. The RTX 3090's 73rd percentile ranking and average score of 27,565, alongside its nearest rivals being desktop-class GPUs like the AMD Radeon RX 6700 XT (27,425, 0.5% delta) and AMD Radeon RX 7800M (27,883, -1.1% delta), place it in high-end desktop territory.

The MX550's 72nd percentile and average score of 26,421, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5060 (26,331, 0.3% delta) and NVIDIA RTX A4000 (26,683, -1% delta), show it competes with entry-level and mobile parts. Its 25 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it can exist in devices where the RTX 3090 physically cannot fit.

Who should pick which? If the requirement is maximum compute performance, ray tracing capability, or large memory capacity, the RTX 3090 is the only choice from this data. If the requirement is a low-power, portable solution with no external power connectors, the MX550 is the only option that fits that envelope. There is no overlap in their use cases — the RTX 3090 targets desktop workstations and high-end gaming rigs, while the MX550 targets ultraportable laptops where battery life and thermals trump raw performance.

Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3090 | NVIDIA GeForce MX550 |

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

| Chip | GA102 | TU117SB |

| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 4,700 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 23.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1395 MHz | 1065 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1695 MHz | 1320 MHz |

| Memory Size | 24 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 936.2 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 10496 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 328 | 32 |

| ROPs | 112 | 16 |

| RT Cores | 82 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 328 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 189.8 GPixel/s | 21.12 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 556.0 GTexel/s | 42.24 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 35.58 TFLOPS | 2.703 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 35.58 TFLOPS (1:1) | 2.703 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 350 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | Triple-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 12-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | null |

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

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| Dimensions | 336 mm x 140 mm x 61 mm | null |

| Release Date | 2020-08-31 | 2021-12-16 |

| Launch MSRP | 1,499 USD | null |