AMD Radeon Pro 575 vs AMD Radeon E9550 MXM

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Pro 575 and AMD Radeon E9550 MXM 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).

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro 575

• Videocard is newer: launch date 8 month(s) later
• Around 36% higher memory clock speed: 6800 MHz vs 5000 MHz
• Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 98.349 vs 96.618
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 539.686 vs 507.291
• Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9613 vs 6622
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 vs 3208
• Around 45% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9613 vs 6622
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 vs 3208

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E9550 MXM

• Around 2% higher core clock speed: 1120 MHz vs 1096 MHz
• Around 29% higher texture fill rate: 182.3 GTexel / s vs 140.8 GTexel / s
• Around 13% higher pipelines: 2304 vs 2048
• Around 29% better floating-point performance: 5,834 gflops vs 4,506 gflops
• Around 26% lower typical power consumption: 95 Watt vs 120 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 5% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 36624 vs 34757
• Around 31% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 112.64 vs 86.154
• Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1474.586 vs 1090.128
• Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 9.473 vs 7.88
• Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3597 vs 2814
• Around 28% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3597 vs 2814

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon Pro 575
GPU 2: AMD Radeon E9550 MXM

Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	34757 36624
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	86.154 112.64
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1090.128 1474.586
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.88 9.473
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	98.349 96.618
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	539.686 507.291
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9613 6622
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2814 3597
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3352 3208
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	9613 6622
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2814 3597
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3352 3208

Compare specifications (specs)