GeForce GTX 550 Ti vs Radeon R7 265

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 and GeForce GTX 550 Ti, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.43
+158%

R7 265 outperforms GTX 550 Ti by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking443702
Place by popularitynot in top-10076
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.320.80
Power efficiency4.782.39
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code namePitcairnGF116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (11 years ago)15 March 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

R7 265 has 565% better value for money than GTX 550 Ti.

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 cores1024192
Core clock speedno data900 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million1,170 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt116 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data100 °C
Texture fill rate59.2028.80
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs3224
TMUs6432

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.016x PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm210 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin1x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz4.1 GB/s
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s98.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortTwo Dual Link DVI-IMini HDMI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.2
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

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:

900p95−100
+150%
38
−150%
Full HD95−100
+157%
37
−157%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.57
+157%
4.03
−157%
  • R7 265 has 157% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how R7 265 and GTX 550 Ti compete in popular games:

  • R7 265 is 150% faster in 900p
  • R7 265 is 157% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.43 4.04
Recency 13 February 2014 15 March 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 116 Watt

R7 265 has a 158.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 550 Ti, on the other hand, has 29.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 550 Ti in performance tests.

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.


AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti
GeForce GTX 550 Ti

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.9 59589 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 550 Ti on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 265 or GeForce GTX 550 Ti, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.