Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
AMD Radeon HD 8650M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTS 160M
Combined performance score
Radeon HD 8650M outperforms GeForce GTS 160M by 9% in our combined benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 881 | 863 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Value for money | 0.15 | 0.12 |
Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | GCN (2011−2017) |
GPU code name | N10E-GS1 | no data |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 2 March 2009 (15 years old) | 7 January 2013 (11 years old) |
Current price | $230 | $338 |
GTS 160M has 25% better value for money than HD 8650M.
Technical specs
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 | 64 | 384 |
CUDA cores | 64 | no data |
Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 650 MHz |
Number of transistors | 505 million | 900 Million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | no data |
Texture fill rate | 19 billion/sec | no data |
Floating-point performance | 192 gflops | no data |
Gigaflops | 288 | no data |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon HD 8650M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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.
Laptop size | large | medium sized |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
SLI options | 2-way | no data |
MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | no data |
Memory
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | Up to 800 MHz | 4500 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 51 GB/s | no data |
Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 | VGADisplayPortDual Link DVIHDMILVDSSingle Link DVI | no data |
HDMI | + | no data |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.1 |
Shader Model | 4.0 | no data |
OpenGL | 2.1 | no data |
OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
Vulkan | N/A | no data |
CUDA | + | no data |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Hitman 3 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 8650M is 100% faster than the GTS 160M.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 8650M is ahead in 7 tests (17%)
- there's a draw in 35 tests (83%)
Advantages and disadvantages
Performance score | 1.75 | 1.90 |
Recency | 2 March 2009 | 7 January 2013 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 28 nm |
We couldn't decide between GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon HD 8650M. The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.