Radeon RX 6550M vs 530

Place in the ranking	815	225
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	GCN (2011−2017)	RDNA 2 (2020−2023)
GPU code name	Meso	Navi 24
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	21 March 2017 (7 years ago)	5 January 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 cores	384	1024
Core clock speed	1024 MHz	2000 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2560 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	80 Watt (50 - 80 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate	24.50	181.8
Floating-point processing power	0.7864 gflops	5.816 gflops

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	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x4
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	DDR3/GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	2250 MHz	18000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	28.8 GB/s	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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	Portable Device Dependent
HDMI	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12.0	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	5.0	6.7
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.2
Vulkan	+	1.3

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.

Radeon 530 2.64

RX 6550M 24.16
+815%

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.

Radeon 530 1018

RX 6550M 9319
+815%

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.

Radeon 530 2327

RX 6550M 20506
+781%

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.

Radeon 530 1542

RX 6550M 14696
+853%

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	16 −313%	66 +313%
1440p	2−3 −1100%	24 +1100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

−700%

40−45
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16 −238%	50−55 +238%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	40−45
Battlefield 5	4−5 −1900%	80−85 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	8 −525%	50−55 +525%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −700%	40−45 +700%
Far Cry 5	10 −460%	55−60 +460%
Far Cry New Dawn	12 −433%	60−65 +433%
Forza Horizon 4	35 −311%	140−150 +311%
Hitman 3	7−8 −600%	45−50 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −438%	110−120 +438%
Metro Exodus	13 −546%	80−85 +546%
Red Dead Redemption 2	13 −392%	60−65 +392%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18 −361%	80−85 +361%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	100−110 +168%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −500%	50−55 +500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	40−45
Battlefield 5	4−5 −1900%	80−85 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7 −614%	50−55 +614%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −700%	40−45 +700%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1020%	55−60 +1020%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 −814%	60−65 +814%
Forza Horizon 4	32 −350%	140−150 +350%
Hitman 3	7−8 −600%	45−50 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −438%	110−120 +438%
Metro Exodus	5 −1580%	80−85 +1580%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9 −611%	60−65 +611%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −818%	101 +818%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −308%	50−55 +308%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	100−110 +168%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −500%	50−55 +500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	40−45
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −733%	50−55 +733%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −700%	40−45 +700%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −1020%	55−60 +1020%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −1008%	140−150 +1008%
Hitman 3	7−8 −600%	45−50 +600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −438%	110−120 +438%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 −700%	88 +700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6 −717%	49 +717%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −168%	100−110 +168%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−967%

60−65
+967%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −1075%	45−50 +1075%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −825%	35−40 +825%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1150%	24−27 +1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −1300%	27−30 +1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1400%	14−16 +1400%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −833%	27−30 +833%
Hitman 3	8−9 −263%	27−30 +263%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −614%	50−55 +614%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1400%	30−33 +1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 −827%	130−140 +827%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−583%

40−45
+583%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −2300%	24−27 +2300%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1800%	18−20 +1800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −650%	14−16 +650%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1300%	14−16 +1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	10−12

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−425%

21−24
+425%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

4K
High Preset

Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%

This is how Radeon 530 and RX 6550M compete in popular games:

RX 6550M is 313% faster in 1080p
RX 6550M is 1100% faster in 1440p

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

in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6550M is 2300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX 6550M is ahead in 57 tests (84%)
there's a draw in 11 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.64	24.16
Recency	21 March 2017	5 January 2023
Chip lithography	28 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	80 Watt

Radeon 530 has 60% lower power consumption.

RX 6550M, on the other hand, has a 815.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6550M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 530 in performance tests.

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