Radeon 550 vs GeForce 9100M G mGPU

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated609
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.37
Power efficiencyno data7.30
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameC77Lexa
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 July 2008 (16 years ago)20 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores16512
Core clock speed450 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1183 MHz
Number of transistors210 million2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate1.80037.86
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPS1.211 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs432

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Lengthno data145 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data56 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0b, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 29 July 2008 20 April 2017
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 50 Watt

9100M G mGPU has 316.7% lower power consumption.

Radeon 550, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9100M G mGPU AMD and Radeon 550. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9100M G mGPU AMD
GeForce 9100M G mGPU AMD
AMD Radeon 550
Radeon 550

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce 9100M G mGPU AMD on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 29 votes

Rate Radeon 550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.