Radeon HD 6650A vs GeForce GT 555M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GT 555M and Radeon HD 6650A, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 6650A outperforms 555M by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1002 | 926 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.39 | 3.41 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GF106 | Onega |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 27 October 2011 (14 years ago) | 19 April 2011 (14 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | Up to 144 | 480 |
| Core clock speed | Up to 753 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 753 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,170 million | 716 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.60 | 14.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.3024 TFLOPS | 0.576 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 48 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | PCI Express 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-A (3.0) |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | DDR3\DDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | Up to 192 bit/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 1569 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | Up to 50.2 GB/s | 28.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Blu-Ray | + | - |
| 3D Gaming | + | - |
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 API | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
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.
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.
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:
| 900p | 19
−26.3%
| 24−27
+26.3%
|
| Full HD | 25
−20%
| 30−35
+20%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−25%
|
45−50
+25%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
−17.6%
|
40−45
+17.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−26.3%
|
24−27
+26.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Fortnite | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−25%
|
45−50
+25%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 18−20
−26.3%
|
24−27
+26.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−25%
|
45−50
+25%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−12
−27.3%
|
14−16
+27.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
−12.5%
|
18−20
+12.5%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−28.6%
|
18−20
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
This is how GT 555M and HD 6650A compete in popular games:
- HD 6650A is 26% faster in 900p
- HD 6650A is 20% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.53 | 1.98 |
| Recency | 27 October 2011 | 19 April 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 GB | 1 GB |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 45 Watt |
GT 555M has an age advantage of 6 months, a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 28.6% lower power consumption.
HD 6650A, on the other hand, has a 29.4% higher aggregate performance score.
The Radeon HD 6650A is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 555M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
