AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM vs Intel HD Graphics 4600
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM and Intel HD Graphics 4600 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: GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 month(s) later
- Around 63% higher core clock speed: 650 MHz vs 400 MHz
- 3.1x more texture fill rate: 15.6 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s
- 24x more pipelines: 480 vs 20
- 12.5x better floating-point performance: 624.0 gflops vs 50 gflops
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1088 vs 988
- Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1088 vs 988
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 25 October 2013 vs 3 June 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz vs 400 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s vs 5 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 480 vs 20 |
| Floating-point performance | 624.0 gflops vs 50 gflops |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1088 vs 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1088 vs 988 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 4600
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 22 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 33% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 60 Watt
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1702 vs 1519
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1702 vs 1519
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2808 vs 2278
- Around 23% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2808 vs 2278
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt vs 60 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1702 vs 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1702 vs 1519 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2808 vs 2278 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2808 vs 2278 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 4600
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
|---|---|---|
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1088 | 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1088 | 988 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1519 | 1702 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1519 | 1702 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2278 | 2808 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2278 | 2808 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 629 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 314 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 3211 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 8.844 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 171.17 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.115 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 10.385 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 12.361 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 194 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM | Intel HD Graphics 4600 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Generation 7.5 |
| Code name | Turks | Haswell GT2 |
| Launch date | 25 October 2013 | 3 June 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 1349 | 1350 |
| Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 624.0 gflops | 50 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 22 nm |
| Pipelines | 480 | 20 |
| Texture fill rate | 15.6 GTexel / s | 5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 60 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Transistor count | 716 million | 392 million |
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon HD 8550 OEM with others
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce 8800 GTS 512
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 640M LE
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
IntelHD Graphics 4600
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
AMDRadeon HD 8400 IGP
AMDRadeon HD 8550 OEM vs
IntelUHD Graphics 610
