GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile vs Quadro FX 550
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro FX 550 with GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5090 Mobile outperforms FX 550 by a whopping 47420% 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 | 1461 | 16 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.38 | 57.19 |
| Architecture | Curie (2003−2013) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | NV43 | GB203 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 20 April 2006 (19 years ago) | 27 March 2025 (less than a 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 cores | no data | 10496 |
| Core clock speed | 360 MHz | 990 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1515 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 146 million | 45,600 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 110 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 95 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.880 | 496.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 31.8 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 112 |
| TMUs | 8 | 328 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 328 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 82 |
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 | large |
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Length | 198 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 128 MB | 24 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 896.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0c (9_3) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 3.0 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 2.0 (full) 2.1 (partial) | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 12.0 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
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 | -0−1 | 165 |
| 1440p | -0−1 | 110 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 75 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 220−230
+0%
|
220−230
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 390
+0%
|
390
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 400−450
+0%
|
400−450
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 301
+0%
|
301
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 280−290
+0%
|
280−290
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 172
+0%
|
172
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Valorant | 400−450
+0%
|
400−450
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 219
+0%
|
219
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 224
+0%
|
224
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 500−550
+0%
|
500−550
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 157
+0%
|
157
+0%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+0%
|
450−500
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 168
+0%
|
168
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 150−160
+0%
|
150−160
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 176
+0%
|
176
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 122
+0%
|
122
+0%
|
| Valorant | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 36 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.15 | 71.28 |
| Recency | 20 April 2006 | 27 March 2025 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 128 MB | 24 GB |
| Chip lithography | 110 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 95 Watt |
FX 550 has 216.7% lower power consumption.
RTX 5090 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 47420% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 18 years, a 19100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2100% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 550 in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro FX 550 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce RTX 5090 Mobile is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
