RTX A2000 Embedded vs Radeon 8065S

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 8065S with RTX A2000 Embedded, including specs and performance data.

Radeon 8065S
2026
55 Watt
47.70
+78.9%

8065S outperforms RTX A2000 Embedded by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking80250
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency67.6959.45
ArchitectureRDNA 3.5 (2025−2026)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGorgon HaloGA107S
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date28 September 2026 (less than a year ago)30 March 2022 (4 years ago)

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 cores25602560
Core clock speed1295 MHz607 MHz
Boost clock speed3000 MHz1177 MHz
Manufacturing process technology4 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate480.094.16
Floating-point processing powerno data6.026 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16080
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Cores4020
L0 Cache1.3 MBno data
L1 Cache1 MB2.5 MB
L2 Cache2 MB2 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
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 Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data96 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 DependentPortable Device Dependent

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 Model6.86.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan1.41.3
CUDA-8.6
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 47.70
+78.9%
RTX A2000 Embedded 26.66

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 19998
+79%
Samples: 14
RTX A2000 Embedded 11175
Samples: 8

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 2 250−260
+82.9%
140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+93.3%
60−65
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
Resident Evil 4 Remake 130−140
+84%
75−80

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 150−160
+87.5%
80−85
Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+82.9%
140−150
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+93.3%
60−65
Far Cry 5 150−160
+90%
80−85
Fortnite 200−210
+89.1%
110−120
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+86%
100−105
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+80%
95−100
Valorant 270−280
+85.3%
150−160

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 150−160
+87.5%
80−85
Counter-Strike 2 250−260
+82.9%
140−150
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+85.3%
150−160
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+93.3%
60−65
Far Cry 5 150−160
+90%
80−85
Fortnite 200−210
+89.1%
110−120
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+86%
100−105
Grand Theft Auto V 140−150
+85%
80−85
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
Metro Exodus 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+80%
95−100
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+89%
100−105
Valorant 270−280
+85.3%
150−160

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 150−160
+87.5%
80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 110−120
+93.3%
60−65
Far Cry 5 150−160
+90%
80−85
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+86%
100−105
Hogwarts Legacy 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+80%
95−100
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 180−190
+89%
100−105

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 200−210
+89.1%
110−120

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 130−140
+90%
70−75
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 300−350
+82.6%
190−200
Grand Theft Auto V 100−110
+87.3%
55−60
Metro Exodus 70−75
+85%
40−45
Valorant 300−350
+86.5%
170−180

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120
+83.1%
65−70
Cyberpunk 2077 60−65
+103%
30−33
Far Cry 5 120−130
+86.2%
65−70
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+83.8%
80−85
Hogwarts Legacy 60−65
+100%
30−33
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 100−110
+85.5%
55−60

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 130−140
+90%
70−75

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 60−65
+100%
30−33
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120
+90%
60−65
Metro Exodus 45−50
+91.7%
24−27
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+84.4%
45−50
Valorant 290−300
+81.3%
160−170

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85
+100%
40−45
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+100%
14−16
Far Cry 5 65−70
+97.1%
35−40
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+83.6%
55−60
Hogwarts Legacy 30−35
+100%
16−18
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80
+92.5%
40−45

4K
Epic

Fortnite 65−70
+97.1%
35−40

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 47.70 26.66
Recency 28 September 2026 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 4 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 35 Watt

Radeon 8065S has a 79% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 50% more advanced lithography process.

RTX A2000 Embedded, on the other hand, has 36% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 8065S is our recommended choice as it beats the RTX A2000 Embedded in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 8065S is a notebook graphics card while RTX A2000 Embedded is a mobile 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.


5 1 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Embedded 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 A2000 Embedded, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.