Component comparison
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce MX550
GeForce RTX 5060 vs GeForce MX550 — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce RTX 5060
- + Release year (+4)
- + VRAM (GB) (+6 GB)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+352 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+20 W)
- + Lithography (nm) (-7 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+17,200M)
- + Die size (mm²) (+19 mm²)
- + CUDA cores (+2816)
- + TMUs (+88)
- + ROPs (+32)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+16.48 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+98.78 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+257.36 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+36.3)
- + PassMark (overall) (+12330)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+25240)
- + Normalized score (+1.1)
B
GeForce MX550
Components are close in specs
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce RTX 5060
|
Component B
GeForce MX550
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2025 (+4) | 2021 |
| VRAM (GB) | 8 GB (+6 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR7 | GDDR6 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 448 GB/s (+352 GB/s) | 96 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit (+64 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 45 W (+20 W) | 25 W |
| Lithography (nm) | 5 nm (-7 nm) | 12 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 21,900M (+17,200M) | 4,700M |
| Die size (mm²) | 181 mm² (+19 mm²) | 200 mm² |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1065 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1320 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 3,840 (+2816) | 1,024 |
| TMUs | 120 (+88) | 32 |
| ROPs | 48 (+32) | 16 |
| RT cores | 30 | — |
| Tensor cores | 120 | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 19.18 TFLOPS (+16.48 TFLOPS) | 2.70 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 119.90 GPixel/s (+98.78 GPixel/s) | 21.12 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 299.60 GTexel/s (+257.36 GTexel/s) | 42.24 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 69.2 (+36.3) | 32.8 |
| PassMark (overall) | 16,749 (+12330) | 4,419 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | — | 2,470 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 31,366 (+25240) | 6,126 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | — | 34,068 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | — | 32,369 |
| Normalized score | 50.3 (+1.1) | 49.1 |
Only in component A
DLSS
ReBAR
ray_tracing
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce RTX 5060 | GeForce MX550 | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Battlefield 5 | 130 FPS | 45 FPS | +188.9% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220 FPS | 55 FPS | +300% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 95 FPS | 21 FPS | +352.4% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 130 FPS | 45 FPS | +188.9% (A) |
| Fortnite | 170 FPS | 60 FPS | +183.3% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 150 FPS | 45 FPS | +233.3% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 255 FPS | 47 FPS | +442.6% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Metro Exodus | 95 FPS | 21 FPS | +352.4% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 110 FPS | 21 FPS | +423.8% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 140 FPS | 50 FPS | +180% (A) |
| Valorant | 230 FPS | 95 FPS | +142.1% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce RTX 5060 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).