RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce MX550

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce MX550 with RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GeForce MX550
2021
2 GB GDDR6, 25 Watt
11.78

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms MX550 by a whopping 316% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking40562
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency32.8429.74
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTU117Sno data
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date17 December 2021 (2 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year 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 cores10245120
Core clock speed1065 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1320 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt115 Watt (60 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate42.24no data
Floating-point processing power2.703 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs32no data

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB12 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-
CUDA7.5-

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.

GeForce MX550 11.78
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 49.06
+316%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GeForce MX550 4546
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 18928
+316%

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.

GeForce MX550 10005
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 41630
+316%

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.

GeForce MX550 6126
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 29248
+377%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GeForce MX550 2470
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 12806
+418%

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 HD46
−313%
190−200
+313%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−293%
110−120
+293%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−295%
150−160
+295%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−296%
95−100
+296%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−307%
110−120
+307%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−294%
130−140
+294%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−285%
300−310
+285%
Hitman 3 21−24
−309%
90−95
+309%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−313%
260−270
+313%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−310%
160−170
+310%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−294%
130−140
+294%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−295%
150−160
+295%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−306%
280−290
+306%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−293%
110−120
+293%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Battlefield 5 35−40
−295%
150−160
+295%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−296%
95−100
+296%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−307%
110−120
+307%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
−294%
130−140
+294%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−285%
300−310
+285%
Hitman 3 21−24
−309%
90−95
+309%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−313%
260−270
+313%
Metro Exodus 35−40
−310%
160−170
+310%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−294%
130−140
+294%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 52
−304%
210−220
+304%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
−300%
120−130
+300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−306%
280−290
+306%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
−293%
110−120
+293%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
−296%
95−100
+296%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
Far Cry 5 27−30
−307%
110−120
+307%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
−285%
300−310
+285%
Hitman 3 21−24
−309%
90−95
+309%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
−313%
260−270
+313%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 42
−305%
170−180
+305%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27
−307%
110−120
+307%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
−306%
280−290
+306%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−294%
130−140
+294%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
−313%
95−100
+313%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−275%
45−50
+275%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−275%
45−50
+275%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−293%
55−60
+293%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
−304%
230−240
+304%
Hitman 3 14−16
−300%
60−65
+300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
−296%
95−100
+296%
Metro Exodus 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18−20
−289%
70−75
+289%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−275%
45−50
+275%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
−305%
300−310
+305%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−12
−309%
45−50
+309%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Hitman 3 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
−300%
220−230
+300%
Metro Exodus 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
−260%
18−20
+260%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−300%
60−65
+300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−300%
16−18
+300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−309%
45−50
+309%

This is how GeForce MX550 and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 313% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 11.78 49.06
Recency 17 December 2021 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 115 Watt

GeForce MX550 has 360% lower power consumption.

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, on the other hand, has a 316.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce MX550 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce MX550 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


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 MX550
GeForce MX550
NVIDIA RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.5 785 votes

Rate GeForce MX550 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 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.