GeForce RTX 4050 vs ATI Radeon X1550

Place in the ranking	1409	124
Place by popularity	not in top-100	41
Power efficiency	0.44	26.08
Architecture	Ultra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	RV516	AD107
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	2007 (17 years ago)	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	no data	2560
Core clock speed	550 MHz	2505 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2640 MHz
Number of transistors	105 million	18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	90 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	27 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	2.200	211.2
Floating-point processing power	no data	13.52 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	4	80
Tensor Cores	no data	120
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	18

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	1-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 12-pin

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	DDR2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	6 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	96 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MBps	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	12.8 GB/s	216.0 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API 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	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	-	8.9

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.

ATI X1550 0.17

RTX 4050 37.40
+21900%

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.

ATI X1550 66

RTX 4050 14427
+21759%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.17	37.40
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	6 GB
Chip lithography	90 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	27 Watt	100 Watt

ATI X1550 has 270.4% lower power consumption.

RTX 4050, on the other hand, has a 21900% higher aggregate performance score, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1700% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4050 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1550 in performance tests.

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