Radeon HD 8550M vs Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) and Radeon HD 8550M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) outperforms HD 8550M by a whopping 583% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 488 | 1027 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Xe LPG (2023) | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) |
| GPU code name | Meteor Lake iGPU | Sun |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 14 December 2023 (1 year ago) | 13 July 2014 (11 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 4 | 320 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 650 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1950 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 690 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 17.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.544 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 20 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 20
+900%
| 2−3
−900%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+614%
|
7−8
−614%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+614%
|
7−8
−614%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+413%
|
8−9
−413%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+168%
|
30−35
−168%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+614%
|
7−8
−614%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+355%
|
30−35
−355%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 22
+633%
|
3−4
−633%
|
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+413%
|
8−9
−413%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 30
+329%
|
7−8
−329%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+168%
|
30−35
−168%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21
+600%
|
3−4
−600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+413%
|
8−9
−413%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+240%
|
10−11
−240%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+129%
|
7−8
−129%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+700%
|
9−10
−700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1633%
|
6−7
−1633%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+667%
|
3−4
−667%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+633%
|
3−4
−633%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+33.3%
|
14−16
−33.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 6−7 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) and HD 8550M compete in popular games:
- Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) is 900% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) is 2700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) is ahead in 39 tests (89%)
- there's a draw in 5 tests (11%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.29 | 1.36 |
| Recency | 14 December 2023 | 13 July 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) has a 583.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8550M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
