ATI Radeon X1550

Memory Subsystem

The ATI Radeon X1550 ships with 128 MB of DDR2 memory on a 64-bit bus. This configuration produces a memory bandwidth of 5.328 GB/s, a figure that directly limits how much texture and geometry data the GPU can feed per second. In practice, the 64-bit interface is the primary constraint here — even with the modest 333 MHz memory clock (666 Mbps effective), the narrow bus means the card cannot keep up with higher-resolution workloads that demand rapid frame buffer access.

For high resolutions, the data indicates a hard ceiling. At 1080p or above, the 128 MB capacity combined with the 5.328 GB/s bandwidth will cause significant stuttering or outright failure to render complex scenes, as the card must constantly swap data in and out of a small VRAM pool. The Radeon X1550 is better suited to 1024x768 or 1280x1024 gaming, where the VRAM footprint per frame is smaller and the bandwidth deficit is less punishing. Benchmark results do not show any scenario where this memory subsystem scales gracefully with resolution increases; it is a fixed, low-end configuration.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The X1550 lacks dedicated ray tracing cores and tensor cores entirely. This is an architecture from the Radeon R500 PCIe generation, built on the Ultra-Threaded SE design, and it predates any hardware-accelerated ray tracing or AI-assisted rendering features. Instead, the card relies on software-based DirectX 9.0c (feature level 9_3) support and OpenGL 2.1 for all graphical effects. There is no Vulkan support listed, which means modern titles that require Vulkan for rendering are incompatible.

The absence of RT cores means any ray-traced effects — reflections, shadows, global illumination — are off the table at any frame rate. Even if a game attempted to compute ray tracing in software on the 4 TMUs and 4 ROPs, the pixel rate of 2.000 GPixel/s and texture rate of 2.000 GTexel/s would be wholly inadequate. The feature set is strictly legacy: it can render older DirectX 9-era games with fixed-function or shader model 3.0 effects, but it offers no path forward for modern graphics APIs or hardware-accelerated lighting techniques. For a builder considering this card for retro gaming, the feature set is sufficient for that narrow purpose; for anything else, it is a non-starter.

Benchmark Performance

The Radeon X1550 has no benchmark scores recorded in the database, with an average benchmark score of zero and a percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs. This is unusual — a percentile of 50 indicates the card sits at the median of all GPUs ever tested, but the zero score suggests that no standardized workloads have produced meaningful results. The data shows this is a card that has not been validated in any modern benchmark suite, likely because its hardware capabilities (4 TMUs, 4 ROPs, 5.328 GB/s bandwidth) are so far below the minimum requirements that test harnesses cannot execute them.

Interpreting the percentile field: a 50th percentile placement with no rivals listed in the nearestRivals array means the card's position is based on its hardware specification rather than measured performance. The pixel rate of 2.000 GPixel/s and texture rate of 2.000 GTexel/s are the theoretical maxima, but without any benchmark scores, these numbers cannot be translated into actual frame rates. The practical takeaway is that this card will perform at the level of early-2000s integrated graphics — playable for 2004-2006 titles at low settings, but with no headroom for anything heavier. The lack of benchmark data is itself a data point: no one has successfully run a modern test on this hardware, which tells a builder more than any synthetic score could.

How It Compares

The nearestRivals array for the X1550 is empty, meaning the database has no direct comparison points. This is a notable absence — every other GPU in the Radeon R500 generation has at least one competitor listed, but the X1550 sits in isolation. The predecessor, Radeon R400 PCIe, and successor, Radeon R600, bracket it chronologically, but no performance deltas are available to quantify the generational gap.

Given the lack of rival data, comparisons must rely on the spec sheet alone. The X1550 uses the RV505 chip on a 90 nm process at TSMC, with 107 million transistors on a 100 mm² die (transistor density of 1.1M per mm²). This is a small, low-power chip — 27 W TDP — designed for OEM desktops and entry-level multimedia, not gaming. Without rival benchmarks, the only honest statement is that the X1550 occupies the lowest tier of its generation, with half the TMUs and ROPs of even mid-range cards from the same era. A builder choosing between this and any discrete GPU from 2006 onward would see superior performance in the alternative, but the data does not allow a specific percentage claim.

FAQ

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the ATI Radeon X1550?

A: The card has a memory bandwidth of 5.328 GB/s, derived from 128 MB of DDR2 memory on a 64-bit bus running at 333 MHz (666 Mbps effective).

Q: Does the X1550 support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The card has no ray tracing cores or tensor cores, and its API support is limited to DirectX 9.0c (feature level 9_3) and OpenGL 2.1. There is no Vulkan support listed.

Q: What power supply is recommended for this card?

A: The suggested PSU rating is 200 W. The card itself has a 27 W TDP and requires no power connectors, drawing all its power from the PCIe 1.0 x16 slot.

Q: What display outputs are available on the X1550?

A: The card provides one DVI port, one VGA port, and one S-Video output. This covers analog monitors and older TVs, but there are no digital-only outputs like HDMI or DisplayPort.

Q: What is the production status of this GPU?

A: The X1550 is marked as end-of-life. Its predecessor is the Radeon R400 PCIe and its successor is the Radeon R600.

Q: What is the pixel and texture fill rate?

A: The card achieves a pixel rate of 2.000 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 2.000 GTexel/s, based on 4 ROPs and 4 TMUs operating at the chip's clock.

Power and Cooling

The Radeon X1550 has a TDP of 27 W, which places it firmly in the low-power segment. This is a single-slot card that requires no auxiliary power connectors — the PCIe 1.0 x16 slot alone provides sufficient power. The suggested power supply is 200 W, which is a modest requirement that any standard desktop PSU from the mid-2000s would satisfy. A builder pairing this with a low-end CPU from the same era would need only a basic 200 W unit, and even modern systems with efficient components would not strain to accommodate this card.

Cooling is a non-issue. The 27 W TDP generates minimal heat, so a passive heatsink or a low-speed fan would suffice; the card is single-slot and does not require elaborate cooling solutions. The 90 nm process at TSMC, with 107 million transistors on a 100 mm² die, is relatively sparse and runs cool at these clocks. The lack of power connectors also means no cable management concerns — this is a plug-and-play card in the simplest sense. For a retro build or a basic office machine, the power and cooling demands are negligible, but the performance ceiling is equally low. The data shows no thermal throttling risk, but also no performance headroom to exploit even if cooling were improved.