Radeon RX 7650 GRE vs GeForce GTX 580
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 580 and Radeon RX 7650 GRE, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 7650 GRE outperforms GTX 580 by a whopping 241% 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 | 448 | 133 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.82 | 77.97 |
| Power efficiency | 3.46 | 17.45 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | Navi 33 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 9 November 2010 (14 years ago) | February 2025 (recently) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | $279 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
RX 7650 GRE has 4184% better value for money than GTX 580.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 512 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 772 MHz | 1720 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2695 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 13,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 244 Watt | 165 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 49.41 | 345.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.581 TFLOPS | 22.08 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 | 64 |
| TMUs | 64 | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
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).
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Length | 267 mm | 204 mm |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |
| 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2004 MHz (4008 data rate) | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.4 GB/s | 288.0 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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 | 53
−240%
| 180−190
+240%
|
| Full HD | 99
−203%
| 300−350
+203%
|
| 1200p | 78
−233%
| 260−270
+233%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.04
−442%
| 0.93
+442%
|
- RX 7650 GRE has 442% lower cost per frame in 1080p
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−239%
|
210−220
+239%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| God of War | 21−24
−241%
|
75−80
+241%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−240%
|
170−180
+240%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−239%
|
210−220
+239%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−224%
|
120−130
+224%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
−228%
|
220−230
+228%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−233%
|
160−170
+233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
−214%
|
110−120
+214%
|
| God of War | 21−24
−241%
|
75−80
+241%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−217%
|
130−140
+217%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−194%
|
300−310
+194%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−240%
|
170−180
+240%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
−239%
|
210−220
+239%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
−235%
|
550−600
+235%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80
−233%
|
260−270
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−224%
|
120−130
+224%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
−228%
|
220−230
+228%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−233%
|
160−170
+233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
−214%
|
110−120
+214%
|
| God of War | 21−24
−241%
|
75−80
+241%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 40−45
−233%
|
140−150
+233%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−217%
|
130−140
+217%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
−228%
|
95−100
+228%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−194%
|
300−310
+194%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
−240%
|
170−180
+240%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| Dota 2 | 75−80
−233%
|
260−270
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
−224%
|
120−130
+224%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
−233%
|
160−170
+233%
|
| God of War | 21−24
−241%
|
75−80
+241%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
−217%
|
130−140
+217%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
−228%
|
95−100
+228%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
−194%
|
300−310
+194%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 65−70
−228%
|
220−230
+228%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
−233%
|
70−75
+233%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
−229%
|
280−290
+229%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−224%
|
55−60
+224%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
−208%
|
40−45
+208%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
−238%
|
240−250
+238%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
−228%
|
400−450
+228%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
−233%
|
100−105
+233%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
−233%
|
30−33
+233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
−233%
|
80−85
+233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
−233%
|
90−95
+233%
|
| God of War | 12−14
−233%
|
40−45
+233%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
−213%
|
50−55
+213%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 24−27
−233%
|
80−85
+233%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−200%
|
18−20
+200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
−226%
|
75−80
+226%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
−200%
|
21−24
+200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−221%
|
45−50
+221%
|
| Valorant | 60−65
−233%
|
200−210
+233%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
−233%
|
50−55
+233%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−200%
|
18−20
+200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−200%
|
12−14
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 40−45
−217%
|
130−140
+217%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
−218%
|
35−40
+218%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
−216%
|
60−65
+216%
|
| God of War | 8−9
−238%
|
27−30
+238%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−218%
|
35−40
+218%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−12
−218%
|
35−40
+218%
|
This is how GTX 580 and RX 7650 GRE compete in popular games:
- RX 7650 GRE is 240% faster in 900p
- RX 7650 GRE is 203% faster in 1080p
- RX 7650 GRE is 233% faster in 1200p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.07 | 37.76 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1536 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 244 Watt | 165 Watt |
RX 7650 GRE has a 241.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 47.9% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 7650 GRE is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 580 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.
