Component comparison
GeForce MX550 vs GeForce RTX 2060
GeForce MX550 vs GeForce RTX 2060 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce MX550
- + Release year (+2)
- + Die size (mm²) (+245 mm²)
- + Energy efficiency (+14.7)
B
GeForce RTX 2060
- + VRAM (GB) (+4 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+250 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+240 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+128 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+90 W)
- + Transistors (M) (+6,100M)
- + CUDA cores (+896)
- + TMUs (+88)
- + ROPs (+32)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+3.75 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+59.52 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+159.36 GTexel/s)
- + PassMark (overall) (+9675)
- + 3DMark Time Spy (+3671)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+10205)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+37344)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+33489)
- + Normalized score (+17.2)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce MX550
|
Component B
GeForce RTX 2060
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2021 (+2) | 2019 |
| VRAM (GB) | 2 GB | 6 GB (+4 GB) |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz | 1750 MHz (+250 MHz) |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 96 GB/s | 336 GB/s (+240 GB/s) |
| Memory bus (bit) | 64 bit | 192 bit (+128 bit) |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 25 W | 115 W (+90 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 4,700M | 10,800M (+6,100M) |
| Die size (mm²) | 200 mm² (+245 mm²) | 445 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | 1065 MHz | — |
| Boost clock (MHz) | 1320 MHz | — |
| CUDA cores | 1,024 | 1,920 (+896) |
| TMUs | 32 | 120 (+88) |
| ROPs | 16 | 48 (+32) |
| RT cores | — | 30 |
| Tensor cores | — | 240 |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 2.70 TFLOPS | 6.45 TFLOPS (+3.75 TFLOPS) |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 21.12 GPixel/s | 80.64 GPixel/s (+59.52 GPixel/s) |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 42.24 GTexel/s | 201.60 GTexel/s (+159.36 GTexel/s) |
| Energy efficiency | 32.8 (+14.7) | 18.1 |
| PassMark (overall) | 4,419 | 14,094 (+9675) |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 2,470 | 6,141 (+3671) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 6,126 | 16,331 (+10205) |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 34,068 | 71,412 (+37344) |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 32,369 | 65,858 (+33489) |
| Normalized score | 49.1 | 66.4 (+17.2) |
Only in component B
DLSS
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce MX550 | GeForce RTX 2060 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 45 FPS | 104 FPS | 131.1% (B) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 55 FPS | 150 FPS | 172.7% (B) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21 FPS | 60 FPS | 185.7% (B) |
| Dota 2 | 111 FPS | 118 FPS | 6.3% (B) |
| Far Cry 5 | 45 FPS | 96 FPS | 113.3% (B) |
| Fortnite | 60 FPS | 162 FPS | 170% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45 FPS | 108 FPS | 140% (B) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 47 FPS | 100 FPS | 112.8% (B) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 21 FPS | 56 FPS | 166.7% (B) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 21 FPS | 65 FPS | 209.5% (B) |
| The Witcher 3 | 50 FPS | 111 FPS | 122% (B) |
| Valorant | 95 FPS | 223 FPS | 134.7% (B) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 2060 wins 18 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).