AMD Radeon E9550 MXM vs AMD Radeon R9 M295X

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E9550 MXM and AMD Radeon R9 M295X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark.

AMD Radeon E9550 MXM

AMD Radeon R9 M295X

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E9550 MXM

Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
Around 55% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 723 MHz
Around 97% higher texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 92.54 GTexel / s
Around 13% higher pipelines: 2304 vs 2048
Around 97% better floating-point performance: 5,834 gflops vs 2,961 gflops
A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
2.6x lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 250 Watt
Around 36% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 36624 vs 26840
Around 71% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 112.64 vs 65.777
Around 80% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1474.586 vs 820.138
Around 33% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.473 vs 7.142
Around 41% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 96.618 vs 68.754
Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 507.291 vs 386.418
Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3597 vs 2045
Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3208 vs 3144
Around 76% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3597 vs 2045
Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3208 vs 3144

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	27 September 2016 vs 23 November 2014
Core clock speed	1120 MHz vs 723 MHz
Texture fill rate	182.3 GTexel / s vs 92.54 GTexel / s
Pipelines	2304 vs 2048
Floating-point performance	5,834 gflops vs 2,961 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm vs 28 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	95 Watt vs 250 Watt
Benchmarks
Geekbench - OpenCL	36624 vs 26840
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	112.64 vs 65.777
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1474.586 vs 820.138
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	9.473 vs 7.142
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	96.618 vs 68.754
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	507.291 vs 386.418
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3597 vs 2045
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3208 vs 3144
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3597 vs 2045
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3208 vs 3144

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M295X

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

36624

26840

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

112.64

65.777

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1474.586

820.138

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

9.473

7.142

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

96.618

68.754

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

507.291

386.418

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3597

2045

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3208

3144

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3597

2045

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

3208

3144

Name	AMD Radeon E9550 MXM	AMD Radeon R9 M295X
Geekbench - OpenCL	36624	26840
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	112.64	65.777
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1474.586	820.138
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	9.473	7.142
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	96.618	68.754
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	507.291	386.418
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	6622
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	3597	2045
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	3208	3144
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	6622
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	3597	2045
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	3208	3144
PassMark - G3D Mark		5150
PassMark - G2D Mark		832

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Radeon E9550 MXM	AMD Radeon R9 M295X
Essentials
Architecture	GCN 4.0	GCN 3.0
Code name	Ellesmere	Amethyst
Launch date	27 September 2016	23 November 2014
Place in performance rating	495	496
Type	Desktop	Desktop
Design		AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
Technical info
Boost clock speed	1266 MHz
Core clock speed	1120 MHz	723 MHz
Floating-point performance	5,834 gflops	2,961 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Pipelines	2304	2048
Texture fill rate	182.3 GTexel / s	92.54 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	95 Watt	250 Watt
Transistor count	5,700 million	5,000 million
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-B (3.0)
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
Bus support		PCIe 3.0
Laptop size		large
API support
DirectX	12.0 (12_0)	Not Listed
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
Mantle
OpenCL		Not Listed
Memory
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB / s	160.0 GB / s
Memory bus width	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz
Memory type	GDDR5	Not Listed
Shared memory		0
Technologies
DualGraphics
FreeSync
HD3D
PowerTune
Switchable graphics
ZeroCore