Articles Comments

AMD Radeon 6550D Vs Intel HD 2000

AMD Radeon 6550D Vs Intel HD 2000

The AMD Radeon 6550D is part of a large number of Llano desktop APUs including the A8-3800 and AMD A8-3850. The integrated graphics is substantially better in performance when compared to the Intel’s HD 2000, found in many of the Sandy Bridge desktop processors (including for example, in core i3-2100).

If the integrated graphics performance is your concern you may like to prefer the AMD’s Llano APUs, possibly at the expense of processing power.

Take a look at some of the benchmark comparison of the Radeon 6550D Vs Intel HD 2000. The performance also depends upon the memory speeds. For example, many of the AMD processors that have Radeon 6550D, support the DDR3-1866 but are often configured at DDR3-1333 which will limit the graphics performance.

The bench mark result is for the DDR3-1866 speed.

The gaming benchmarks are measured with the number of frames per second displayed. Higher the number of the frames played, better is the quality. A fast moving graphics that has substantial change between frames require higher graphics power. We have only compiled some of the results.

Dirt 2

Released in September 2009, Dirt 2 is a racing game sequel to Colin McRae: Dirt. The the Dirt 2 includes new race-events, including stadium events.

The benchmark is for medium quality setting ( 1280 x 1024 resolution).

Intel’s HD 2000 is obviously no match to the Radeon HD 6550D.

Mass 2

The benchmarking result for the Mass 2 games benchmark, buttress the supremacy of AMD 6550D. The results are for the minimum quality ( 1280 X 1024 resolution).

Crysis Warhead

And finally here are the results for the Cysis Warhead at performance quality benchmark at 1280 x 1024 resolution.


AMD has taken un assailable lead in the integrated graphics with the launch of the Llano APUs. For the first time you have a processor that does not need an additional graphics card. You get a $100 to $125 processor and you do not have to spend a penny on the graphics card. This is where AMD wins in the dollar equation.

Unfortunately, AMD lags in the processor performance. Games that are CPU intensive, reduce the advantage that AMD has over Intel in the graphics area. Nonetheless, if the low cost gaming is your area of concern, AMD deserves a serious look.

Related posts:

  1. HP 2000-329WM Notebook
  2. HP 2000-329WM Specification
  3. AMD Radeon HD 6520G
  4. HP 2000-329WM Faq

3 Response

  1. Jyothis says:

    Why spending a fortune to buy the mighty Core i7 2600K and wasting your money ?
    Also you need a discrete graphics card like Nvidia GTX 560.
    To run this setup you need a high power PSU of minimum 500W from Antec or Corsair.Again wastage of money….

    Buy an A8-3870K APU 3.0Ghz and FM2 socket motherboard(future proof)
    Pair it with some 2x2GB DDR3 1866Mhz RAM.You can play Battlefield 3 without any lags at 1280×720 (720p) resolution.It consumes only 120W maximum for the APU(CPU+GPU)

    The above Intel CPU will consume 150W and Nvidia GPU also 150W.
    The price is also 4 times high than the AMD setup.

    1. Borsik says:

      Strongly agree!!! )))
      My conf:
      A8-3870K; GIGABYTE A75MA-D2H; Seagate SATA III 7200 rpm 2T + 1T two HDD;
      Kingston 2x4Gb(8Gb) Hyper-X XMP emproved (tRAS=24(27) tRC=33(36)) profile @ 1600MHz; Delta PSU 400W – quality is extremely important!; Pioneer DVD;

Leave a Reply