Radeon RX 6550M vs GeForce GTX 980M SLI

Place in the ranking	227	218
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	8.49	21.57
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	no data	Navi 24
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	7 October 2014 (10 years ago)	4 January 2023 (2 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	3072	1024
Core clock speed	1038 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	1127 MHz	2840 MHz
Number of transistors	2x 5200 Million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	80 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	181.8
Floating-point processing power	no data	5.816 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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	large	medium sized
Interface	no data	PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	2x 8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	2x 256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	144.0 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

Portable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.7
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	+	-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 980M SLI 24.67

RX 6550M 25.07
+1.6%

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.

GTX 980M SLI 22006
+7.3%

RX 6550M 20506

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 980M SLI 18632
+26.8%

RX 6550M 14696

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:

900p	135 +3.8%	130−140 −3.8%
Full HD	110 +61.8%	68 −61.8%
1440p	21−24 −14.3%	24 +14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	45−50 −15.2%	53 +15.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 −2%	50−55 +2%
Elden Ring	80−85 −1.2%	80−85 +1.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 −1.3%	75−80 +1.3%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +2.2%	45 −2.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 −2%	50−55 +2%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −13.9%	123 +13.9%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −1.5%	65−70 +1.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
Valorant	95−100 −2%	100−110 +2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 −1.3%	75−80 +1.3%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +31.4%	35 −31.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 −2%	50−55 +2%
Dota 2	85−90 −1.2%	85−90 +1.2%
Elden Ring	80−85 −1.2%	80−85 +1.2%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +130%	33 −130%
Fortnite	120−130 −1.6%	120−130 +1.6%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +6.9%	101 −6.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	85−90 −1.2%	85−90 +1.2%
Metro Exodus	65−70 −1.5%	65−70 +1.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 −0.6%	150−160 +0.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 −1.9%	55−60 +1.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	103 +27.2%	80−85 −27.2%
Valorant	95−100 −2%	100−110 +2%
World of Tanks	250−260 −0.8%	250−260 +0.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 −1.3%	75−80 +1.3%
Counter-Strike 2	45−50 +58.6%	29 −58.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	50−55 −2%	50−55 +2%
Dota 2	85−90 −1.2%	85−90 +1.2%
Far Cry 5	75−80 −1.3%	75−80 +1.3%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 +22.7%	88 −22.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 −0.6%	150−160 +0.6%
Valorant	95−100 −2%	100−110 +2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	40−45 −2.4%	40−45 +2.4%
Elden Ring	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
World of Tanks	160−170 −1.8%	160−170 +1.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	70−75 −1.4%	70−75 +1.4%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 −3.1%	65−70 +3.1%
Metro Exodus	55−60 −1.8%	55−60 +1.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −2.8%	35−40 +2.8%
Valorant	65−70 −3%	65−70 +3%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −4.5%	21−24 +4.5%
Dota 2	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Elden Ring	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Metro Exodus	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 −2.7%	75−80 +2.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	21−24 −4.5%	21−24 +4.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Dota 2	40−45 −2.3%	40−45 +2.3%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Fortnite	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Valorant	30−35 −3.1%	30−35 +3.1%

This is how GTX 980M SLI and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

GTX 980M SLI is 4% faster in 900p
GTX 980M SLI is 62% faster in 1080p
RX 6550M is 14% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980M SLI is 130% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6550M is 15% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 980M SLI is ahead in 7 tests (11%)
RX 6550M is ahead in 42 tests (67%)
there's a draw in 14 tests (22%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.67	25.07
Recency	7 October 2014	4 January 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	80 Watt

RX 6550M has a 1.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 980M SLI and Radeon RX 6550M.

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