Radeon RX 6650 XT vs GeForce 320M
Aggregate performance score
Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms GeForce 320M by a whopping 8191% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1183 | 68 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 30.30 |
| Architecture | GT2xx (2009−2012) | Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022) |
| GPU code name | MCP89 | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 April 2010 (14 years ago) | 10 May 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
| Current price | $408 | $465 (1.2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GeForce 320M and RX 6650 XT have a nearly equal value for money.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 32 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 2055 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2635 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 486 million | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 176 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 7.200 | 337.3 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce 320M and Radeon RX 6650 XT compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 type | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 17500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 280.3 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms GeForce 320M by 8191% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms GeForce 320M by 8176% in Passmark.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms GeForce 320M by 5621% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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 HD | 12
−1025%
| 135
+1025%
|
| 1440p | 0−1 | 67 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 37 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−4167%
|
128
+4167%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−4850%
|
95−100
+4850%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3500%
|
108
+3500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2050%
|
85−90
+2050%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−6550%
|
130−140
+6550%
|
| Hitman 3 | 3−4
−3600%
|
110−120
+3600%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−2873%
|
327
+2873%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−3313%
|
273
+3313%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−4850%
|
95−100
+4850%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2833%
|
88
+2833%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1625%
|
69
+1625%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−6550%
|
130−140
+6550%
|
| Hitman 3 | 3−4
−3600%
|
110−120
+3600%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−2300%
|
264
+2300%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
−2150%
|
180
+2150%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−5967%
|
182
+5967%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−4850%
|
95−100
+4850%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2500%
|
78
+2500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−2050%
|
85−90
+2050%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−6550%
|
130−140
+6550%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
−1473%
|
173
+1473%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−3467%
|
107
+3467%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
−1650%
|
70−75
+1650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4300%
|
44
+4300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−11300%
|
114
+11300%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 3−4
−4200%
|
129
+4200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−6700%
|
65−70
+6700%
|
4K
High Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1125%
|
49
+1125%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2
−5800%
|
55−60
+5800%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2
−7100%
|
72
+7100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−1400%
|
60
+1400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−1950%
|
40−45
+1950%
|
This is how GeForce 320M and RX 6650 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6650 XT is 1025% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6650 XT is 11300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 6650 XT surpassed GeForce 320M in all 32 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.54 | 44.77 |
| Recency | 1 April 2010 | 10 May 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 23 Watt | 176 Watt |
The Radeon RX 6650 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6650 XT is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
