AMD Radeon RX 6550M vs NVIDIA N1X 40SM Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6550M and NVIDIA N1X 40SM represent two very different approaches to integrated graphics. The RX 6550M is a discrete-class mobile GPU built on RDNA 2.0, while the N1X 40SM is an IGP based on Blackwell 2.0. The benchmark database contains no direct head-to-head test results between these two parts, so the analysis here relies on their individual recorded scores, architectural specifications, and relative positions within the broader GPU landscape.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable for this pairing. The database lists no shared test results for the AMD Radeon RX 6550M and the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. What does exist is a single average benchmark score for the RX 6550M, calculated from its Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results, while the N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark scores at all.

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M delivers an average benchmark score of 46702. This figure is drawn from two tests: 42536 in Geekbench OpenCL and 50867 in Geekbench Vulkan. The Vulkan result exceeds the OpenCL score by roughly 20%, indicating that the RDNA 2.0 architecture responds well to the Vulkan API's lower overhead and better parallelism utilization.

In terms of overall GPU ranking, the RX 6550M sits at the 85th percentile among all GPUs in the database. That places it firmly in the upper-middle tier of recorded hardware. Its nearest rivals, as determined by average score, are the Intel Arc A530M at 46614 (a 0.2% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 5600M at 46601 (0.2% difference), the NVIDIA RTX A2000 at 46043 (1.4% difference), and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation at 45972 (1.6% difference). The RX 6550M leads all four of these competing parts, though the margins are narrow. The gap to the Arc A530M is just 88 points, which is well within run-to-run variance for synthetic workloads. The larger deltas, 1.4% and 1.6% against the two NVIDIA professional cards, are still modest but consistent.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM, by contrast, has no benchmark entries in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile rank is 50th, which is the median position for an unmeasured part. This does not necessarily indicate poor performance; it simply means no data has been captured. The N1X 40SM's theoretical compute figures, however, suggest it would be competitive. Its FP32 throughput of 24.02 TFLOPS is more than four times the RX 6550M's 5.816 TFLOPS. Its texture rate of 750.7 GTexel/s dwarfs the AMD part's 181.8 GTexel/s. These are raw specifications, not measured outcomes, but they point to a substantial performance advantage in compute-heavy workloads if real-world results align with the architectural capabilities.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge at nearly every level of their design. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M uses the Navi 24 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It contains 5,400 million transistors on a die size of 107 mm², yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM uses the GB20B chip, built on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die size is 382 mm², which is 3.6 times larger than the Navi 24, though NVIDIA's transistor count is listed as unknown in the database.

The memory subsystems are radically different. The RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 273.2 GB/s. That is 32 times the capacity and roughly 90% more bandwidth. The N1X 40SM's memory clock is 1067 MHz with 8.5 Gbps effective, while the RX 6550M's memory runs at 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective. The AMD part's higher per-pin speed compensates for its narrower bus, but the NVIDIA part's wider bus still wins on total throughput.

Compute resources also differ sharply. The RX 6550M has 1024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, 32 render output units, and 16 ray tracing cores. The N1X 40SM has 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, 40 ROPs, 40 RT cores, and 160 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 5 times the shading units, 5 times the TMUs, and 2.5 times the RT cores. The RX 6550M has no tensor cores, while the N1X 40SM's 160 tensor cores enable AI-accelerated workloads. The FP16 throughput tells a similar story: the RX 6550M delivers 11.63 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio relative to FP32, while the N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, meaning it does not sacrifice precision for half-rate compute.

Clock speeds favor the AMD part. The RX 6550M has a base clock of 2000 MHz, a game clock of 2560 MHz, and a boost clock of 2840 MHz. The N1X 40SM has a base clock of just 741 MHz and a boost of 2346 MHz. The AMD chip runs at a much higher sustained frequency, which helps close the gap in pixel throughput. The pixel rates are close: 90.88 GPixel/s for the RX 6550M versus 93.84 GPixel/s for the N1X 40SM. The texture rates, however, are not close at all, as the NVIDIA part's 750.7 GTexel/s is 4.1 times the AMD part's 181.8 GTexel/s.

API support is a major differentiator. The RX 6550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The N1X 40SM lists N/A for DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan. The NVIDIA part may rely on proprietary or alternate interfaces, given its Blackwell IGP design, but the database records no standard graphics API support. This is a significant caveat for compatibility with existing games and applications.

The bus interface also differs. The RX 6550M uses PCIe 4.0 x4, a narrow but modern connection. The N1X 40SM uses PCIe 5.0 x16, offering substantially more bandwidth to the host system. Both are listed as IGP slot width with no power connectors, though the RX 6550M has a TDP of 80 W while the N1X 40SM's TDP is unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6550M wins in scenarios that favor its strengths. Its higher clock speeds, 2000 MHz base and 2840 MHz boost, make it responsive for latency-sensitive tasks. Its 4 GB GDDR6 memory is sufficient for lighter workloads, and its 144.0 GB/s bandwidth, while modest, is adequate for 1080p gaming at moderate settings. The Vulkan benchmark score of 50867 shows that it performs strongly in modern cross-platform graphics APIs. Its 85th percentile ranking among all GPUs confirms that it is a capable performer within its class. The narrow victory margins over its nearest rivals, all within 1.6%, suggest that it trades blows with similar midrange parts without a decisive edge.

The RX 6550M also wins on software compatibility. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 means it can run a broad range of existing titles and applications without translation layers. The 16 ray tracing cores provide hardware acceleration for RT workloads, though the modest shading unit count will limit ray tracing performance in practice. The 6 nm process node and 80 W TDP indicate a power-efficient design suitable for thin-and-light laptops.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM wins in raw compute density. Its 5120 shading units, 320 TMUs, and 24.02 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput put it in a different performance class entirely. The 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory is an extraordinary capacity for a GPU, opening possibilities for large in-memory datasets, AI inference, and creative workloads that would quickly exhaust the RX 6550M's 4 GB allocation. The 273.2 GB/s bandwidth, while not extreme for a 256-bit bus, is still 90% higher than the AMD part's. The 160 tensor cores give the N1X 40SM a dedicated path for machine learning tasks that the RX 6550M cannot accelerate at all.

The N1X 40SM's larger die, 382 mm² versus 107 mm², and its PCIe 5.0 x16 interface suggest it is designed for high-throughput environments where data movement matters. Its 40 RT cores double the AMD part's ray tracing capability, and its 750.7 GTexel/s texture rate indicates exceptional fill-rate potential. The 5 nm process node is slightly more advanced than AMD's 6 nm, though the database lists no transistor count for the NVIDIA chip, so density comparisons are impossible.

The lack of benchmark data for the N1X 40SM means its wins are theoretical. The database shows no recorded scores, no nearest rivals, and a median percentile rank. Every architectural advantage it holds is derived from specifications, not measurements. This is a critical distinction: the RX 6550M has proven results, while the N1X 40SM has only potential.

The Verdict

The data supports very different conclusions for each part. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M is a measured, verified performer. Its average benchmark score of 46702 places it above the Intel Arc A530M, the AMD Radeon RX 5600M, the NVIDIA RTX A2000, and the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation. Its 85th percentile ranking puts it in the upper tier of all GPUs in the database. For users who need a GPU that works today with standard APIs, DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, the RX 6550M is the only one of these two parts with any recorded evidence of functionality.

The NVIDIA N1X 40SM is a specification sheet with no test results. Its 50th percentile ranking is a placeholder, not an assessment. The architectural numbers are impressive on paper: 5120 shading units, 24.02 TFLOPS FP32, 128 GB memory, 160 tensor cores, PCIe 5.0 x16. If those translate to real-world performance, the N1X 40SM would outperform the RX 6550M by a wide margin in compute-heavy tasks. But the database records no benchmark scores, no API support, and no competing parts to compare against. The N1X 40SM is an unknown quantity with high theoretical ceilings.

The choice between them depends on what the data can support. For verified performance, standard API compatibility, and a known position in the GPU hierarchy, the AMD Radeon RX 6550M is the defensible option. Its 4 GB memory is a limitation for modern games and large datasets, but its benchmark results confirm it operates as expected. For maximum raw compute, massive memory capacity, and AI acceleration, the NVIDIA N1X 40SM is the speculative pick. Its 128 GB LPDDR5X and 24.02 TFLOPS are figures that no other part in this comparison can approach, but they remain unvalidated.

The release dates also matter. The RX 6550M launched on 2023-01-03 and is listed as Active. The N1X 40SM has a release date of 2026-05-31, also Active, but its future positioning is unclear. The RX 6550M has a predecessor, Polaris Mobile, while the N1X 40SM does not. Neither part has a successor listed. The RX 6550M is part of the Radeon RX 6000 series, while the N1X 40SM belongs to no named series.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has an average benchmark score of 46702, while the NVIDIA N1X 40SM has no recorded benchmark scores and an average of 0.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 64-bit bus. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM has 128 GB of LPDDR5X memory on a 256-bit bus.

Q: What are the FP32 performance figures?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M delivers 5.816 TFLOPS of FP32 compute. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM delivers 24.02 TFLOPS.

Q: Does the NVIDIA N1X 40SM support DirectX 12?

A: The database lists DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan support as N/A for the NVIDIA N1X 40SM. The AMD Radeon RX 6550M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 6550M compare to its nearest rivals?

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

Q: What is the transistor count for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6550M has 5,400 million transistors. The NVIDIA N1X 40SM's transistor count is listed as unknown in the database.