RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon RX 6650 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6650 XT with RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.

RX 6650 XT
2022, $399
8 GB GDDR6, 176 Watt
41.07
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile
2023
12 GB GDDR6, 100 Watt
47.36
+15.3%

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms 6650 XT by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11379
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation54.27no data
Power efficiency18.0536.64
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameNavi 23AD104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date10 May 2022 (4 years ago)21 March 2023 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

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 cores20485120
Core clock speed2055 MHz1110 MHz
Boost clock speed2635 MHz1545 MHz
Number of transistors11,060 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)176 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate337.3247.2
Floating-point processing power10.79 TFLOPS15.82 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs128160
Tensor Coresno data160
Ray Tracing Cores3240
L0 Cache512 KBno data
L1 Cache512 KB5 MB
L2 Cache2 MB48 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed2190 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth280.3 GB/s432.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4aPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

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 Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3
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.

RX 6650 XT 41.07
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 47.36
+15.3%

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.

RX 6650 XT 17111
Samples: 5225
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 19730
+15.3%
Samples: 876

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX 6650 XT 41739
+0.3%
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 41630

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX 6650 XT 29796
+1.9%
RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 29248

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD138
−8.7%
150−160
+8.7%
1440p69
−8.7%
75−80
+8.7%
4K36
−11.1%
40−45
+11.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.89no data
1440p5.78no data
4K11.08no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 346
−1.2%
350−400
+1.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 128
−9.4%
140−150
+9.4%
Palworld 146
−9.6%
160−170
+9.6%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 225
−11.1%
250−260
+11.1%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
−8.7%
150−160
+8.7%
Counter-Strike 2 342
−2.3%
350−400
+2.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 108
−11.1%
120−130
+11.1%
Far Cry 5 173
−9.8%
190−200
+9.8%
Fortnite 170−180
−12.4%
200−210
+12.4%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
−13.2%
180−190
+13.2%
Palworld 116
−12.1%
130−140
+12.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−12.5%
180−190
+12.5%
Valorant 230−240
−13.9%
270−280
+13.9%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
−8.7%
150−160
+8.7%
Counter-Strike 2 181
−10.5%
200−210
+10.5%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
−7.9%
300−310
+7.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 88
−13.6%
100−105
+13.6%
Dota 2 171
−11.1%
190−200
+11.1%
Far Cry 5 163
−10.4%
180−190
+10.4%
Fortnite 170−180
−12.4%
200−210
+12.4%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
−13.2%
180−190
+13.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 147
−8.8%
160−170
+8.8%
Metro Exodus 102
−7.8%
110−120
+7.8%
Palworld 81
−11.1%
90−95
+11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−12.5%
180−190
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 182
−9.9%
200−210
+9.9%
Valorant 230−240
−13.9%
270−280
+13.9%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
−8.7%
150−160
+8.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
−9%
85−90
+9%
Dota 2 136
−10.3%
150−160
+10.3%
Far Cry 5 151
−12.6%
170−180
+12.6%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
−13.2%
180−190
+13.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−12.5%
180−190
+12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 107
−12.1%
120−130
+12.1%
Valorant 230−240
−13.9%
270−280
+13.9%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
−12.4%
200−210
+12.4%
Palworld 75
−13.3%
85−90
+13.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 108
−11.1%
120−130
+11.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 290−300
−2.7%
300−310
+2.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 77
−10.4%
85−90
+10.4%
Metro Exodus 58
−12.1%
65−70
+12.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−14.3%
200−210
+14.3%
Valorant 270−280
−11.1%
300−310
+11.1%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
−14.3%
120−130
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 44
−13.6%
50−55
+13.6%
Far Cry 5 114
−14%
130−140
+14%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
−8.3%
130−140
+8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
−11.1%
90−95
+11.1%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
−8.1%
120−130
+8.1%
Palworld 52
−5.8%
55−60
+5.8%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 27
−11.1%
30−33
+11.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 72
−11.1%
80−85
+11.1%
Metro Exodus 37
−8.1%
40−45
+8.1%
Palworld 35−40
−5.3%
40−45
+5.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
−7.1%
60−65
+7.1%
Valorant 250−260
−14.2%
290−300
+14.2%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
−13.6%
75−80
+13.6%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
−12.2%
55−60
+12.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 97
−13.4%
110−120
+13.4%
Far Cry 5 55
−9.1%
60−65
+9.1%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−12.5%
90−95
+12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
−12.1%
65−70
+12.1%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
−9.1%
60−65
+9.1%
Palworld 27
−11.1%
30−33
+11.1%

This is how RX 6650 XT and RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 9% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 9% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is 11% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 41.07 47.36
Recency 10 May 2022 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 176 Watt 100 Watt

RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile has a 15% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 months, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 76% lower power consumption.

The RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX 6650 XT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX 6650 XT is a desktop graphics card while RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile 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.


4.4 4229 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 65 votes

Rate RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX 6650 XT or RTX 3500 Ada Generation Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.