AMD Radeon E9550 MXM vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850A
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E9550 MXM and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850A 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 2 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 24% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 902 MHz
- Around 35% higher boost clock speed: 1266 MHz vs 936 MHz
- 4.9x more texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 37.44 GTexel / s
- 3.6x more pipelines: 2304 vs 640
- 4.9x better floating-point performance: 5,834 gflops vs 1,198 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 2 GB
- 2.8x more memory clock speed: 5000 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- Around 72% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6622 vs 3857
- Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3597 vs 2957
- Around 72% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6622 vs 3857
- Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3597 vs 2957
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 27 September 2016 vs 17 March 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 1120 MHz vs 902 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz vs 936 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s vs 37.44 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2304 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 5,834 gflops vs 1,198 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 2 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6622 vs 3857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3597 vs 2957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6622 vs 3857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3597 vs 2957 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850A
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 95 Watt
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3351 vs 3208
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3351 vs 3208
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt vs 95 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 vs 3208 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 vs 3208 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E9550 MXM
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850A
| 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 GeForce GTX 850A |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3597 | 2957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3208 | 3351 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6622 | 3857 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3597 | 2957 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3208 | 3351 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1050 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 551 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon E9550 MXM | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850A | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell |
| Code name | Ellesmere | GM107 |
| Launch date | 27 September 2016 | 17 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 516 | 513 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1266 MHz | 936 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1120 MHz | 902 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 5,834 gflops | 1,198 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 182.3 GTexel / s | 37.44 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,700 million | 1,870 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 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 160.0 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 1800 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon E9550 MXM with others
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
ATIRadeon X1300 PRO
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAQuadro FX 3500M
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
AMDFirePro W7000
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
AMDRadeon Sky 500
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850A
AMDRadeon E9550 MXM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 730A
