RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs Radeon 8065S

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 8065S with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

Radeon 8065S
2026
55 Watt
44.23
+8.8%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation
2024, $649
16 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
40.67

8065S outperforms RTX 2000 Ada Generation by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking98115
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data36.86
Power efficiency62.2144.95
ArchitectureRDNA 3.5 (2025−2026)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGorgon HaloAD107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date2026 (recently)12 February 2024 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores25602816
Core clock speed1295 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed3000 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate480.0187.4
Floating-point processing powerno data12 TFLOPS
ROPs6448
TMUs16088
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Cores4022
L1 Cacheno data2.8 MB
L2 Cache2 MB12 MB
L3 Cache32 MBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 5.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.86.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.41.3
CUDA-8.9
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Radeon 8065S 44.23
+8.8%
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 40.67

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Radeon 8065S 18426
+8.7%
Samples: 1
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 16944
Samples: 1001

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+9.1%
220−230
−9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+11.6%
95−100
−11.6%
Palworld 120−130
+10.9%
110−120
−10.9%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 120−130
+12.7%
110−120
−12.7%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 140−150
+10%
130−140
−10%
Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+9.1%
220−230
−9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+11.6%
95−100
−11.6%
Far Cry 5 140−150
+17.5%
120−130
−17.5%
Fortnite 190−200
+12.4%
170−180
−12.4%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+14%
150−160
−14%
Palworld 120−130
+10.9%
110−120
−10.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+11.3%
150−160
−11.3%
Valorant 250−260
+9.1%
230−240
−9.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 140−150
+10%
130−140
−10%
Counter-Strike 2 240−250
+9.1%
220−230
−9.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+11.2%
250−260
−11.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+11.6%
95−100
−11.6%
Far Cry 5 140−150
+17.5%
120−130
−17.5%
Fortnite 190−200
+12.4%
170−180
−12.4%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+14%
150−160
−14%
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+9.2%
130−140
−9.2%
Metro Exodus 100−110
+9%
100−105
−9%
Palworld 120−130
+10.9%
110−120
−10.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+11.3%
150−160
−11.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160−170
+12.7%
150−160
−12.7%
Valorant 250−260
+9.1%
230−240
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 140−150
+10%
130−140
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 100−110
+11.6%
95−100
−11.6%
Far Cry 5 140−150
+17.5%
120−130
−17.5%
Forza Horizon 4 170−180
+14%
150−160
−14%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+11.3%
150−160
−11.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160−170
+12.7%
150−160
−12.7%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 190−200
+12.4%
170−180
−12.4%
Palworld 120−130
+10.9%
110−120
−10.9%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+19%
100−105
−19%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+9%
290−300
−9%
Grand Theft Auto V 95−100
+11.8%
85−90
−11.8%
Metro Exodus 65−70
+11.7%
60−65
−11.7%
Valorant 280−290
+9.6%
260−270
−9.6%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+11%
100−105
−11%
Cyberpunk 2077 55−60
+10%
50−55
−10%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+10%
100−105
−10%
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+10%
120−130
−10%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90−95
+13.8%
80−85
−13.8%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 120−130
+10%
110−120
−10%
Palworld 70−75
+16.7%
60−65
−16.7%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+20%
45−50
−20%
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+13.3%
90−95
−13.3%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+20%
35−40
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75
+13.8%
65−70
−13.8%
Valorant 270−280
+8.8%
250−260
−8.8%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+10.8%
65−70
−10.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+12.7%
55−60
−12.7%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+11.3%
80−85
−11.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+10%
60−65
−10%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 60−65
+10.9%
55−60
−10.9%
Palworld 40−45
+17.1%
35−40
−17.1%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 44.23 40.67
Chip lithography 4 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 70 Watt

Radeon 8065S has a 9% higher aggregate performance score, a 25% more advanced lithography process, and 27% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon 8065S and RTX 2000 Ada Generation.

Be aware that Radeon 8065S is a notebook graphics card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon 8065S on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 100 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 8065S or RTX 2000 Ada Generation, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.