AMD Radeon E9550 MXM vs NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E9550 MXM and NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. 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.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
- Around 20% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 930 MHz
- Around 7% higher boost clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 1180 MHz
- Around 21% higher texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 151.0 GTexel / s
- Around 13% higher pipelines: 2304 vs 2048
- Around 21% better floating-point performance: 5,834 gflops vs 4,833 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 2.4x lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 225 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6622 vs 5460
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3597 vs 3526
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6622 vs 5460
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3597 vs 3526
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 September 2016 vs 30 August 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 1120 MHz vs 930 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 1180 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s vs 151.0 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2304 vs 2048 |
| Floating-point performance | 5,834 gflops vs 4,833 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt vs 225 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6622 vs 5460 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3597 vs 3526 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6622 vs 5460 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3597 vs 3526 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3350 vs 3208
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3350 vs 3208
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 5000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 vs 3208 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 vs 3208 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
GPU 2: NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon E9550 MXM | NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q |
|---|---|---|
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 36624 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 112.64 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1474.586 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 9.473 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 96.618 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 507.291 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6622 | 5460 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3597 | 3526 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3208 | 3350 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6622 | 5460 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3597 | 3526 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3208 | 3350 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 5203 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 311 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon E9550 MXM | NVIDIA GRID M60-2Q | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | Ellesmere | GM204 |
| Launch date | 27 September 2016 | 30 August 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 501 | 474 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz | 1180 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1120 MHz | 930 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 5,834 gflops | 4,833 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 2048 |
| Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s | 151.0 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,700 million | 5,200 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 267 mm | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB / s | 160.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 5012 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon E9550 MXM with others
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
ATIFireGL V7300
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 550
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAQuadro NVS 510M
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 9500M GE
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 740A
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 720A
