ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650 vs GeForce RTX 3080 Ti
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 3080 Ti with Mobility Radeon HD 3650, including specs and performance data.
3080 Ti outperforms Mobility HD 3650 by a whopping 19503% 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 | 36 | 1354 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 28.06 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.98 | 0.83 |
| Architecture | Ampere (2020−2025) | TeraScale (2005−2013) |
| GPU code name | GA102 | M86 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 31 May 2021 (4 years ago) | 7 January 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 | 10240 | 120 |
| Core clock speed | 1365 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 28,300 million | 378 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 532.8 | 4.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 34.1 TFLOPS | 0.12 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 112 | 4 |
| TMUs | 320 | 8 |
| Tensor Cores | 320 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 80 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 10 MB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB | 128 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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | MXM-II |
| Length | 285 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 12-pin | no 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 type | GDDR6X | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 384 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1188 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 912.4 GB/s | 22.4 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 Connectors | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 10.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | N/A |
| CUDA | 8.6 | - |
| 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.
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.
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 | 215
+21400%
| 1−2
−21400%
|
| 1440p | 144 | 0−1 |
| 4K | 96 | -0−1 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 5.58 | no data |
| 1440p | 8.33 | no data |
| 4K | 12.49 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+30700%
|
1−2
−30700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 219
+21800%
|
1−2
−21800%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 150−160
+3020%
|
5−6
−3020%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+30700%
|
1−2
−30700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 184
+18300%
|
1−2
−18300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 208
+20700%
|
1−2
−20700%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+30100%
|
1−2
−30100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 250−260
+6300%
|
4−5
−6300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 200
+19900%
|
1−2
−19900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 150−160
+3020%
|
5−6
−3020%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2400%
|
7−8
−2400%
|
| Valorant | 350−400
+1308%
|
24−27
−1308%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 300−350
+30700%
|
1−2
−30700%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+1886%
|
14−16
−1886%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 160
+15900%
|
1−2
−15900%
|
| Dota 2 | 234
+2240%
|
10−11
−2240%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 198
+19700%
|
1−2
−19700%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+30100%
|
1−2
−30100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 250−260
+6300%
|
4−5
−6300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 188 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 174 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 150−160
+3020%
|
5−6
−3020%
|
| Metro Exodus | 172 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2400%
|
7−8
−2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 372
+7340%
|
5−6
−7340%
|
| Valorant | 350−400
+1308%
|
24−27
−1308%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 196 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 146
+14500%
|
1−2
−14500%
|
| Dota 2 | 217
+2070%
|
10−11
−2070%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 186 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 250−260
+6300%
|
4−5
−6300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 150−160
+3020%
|
5−6
−3020%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2400%
|
7−8
−2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 181
+3520%
|
5−6
−3520%
|
| Valorant | 388
+1392%
|
24−27
−1392%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 300−350
+30100%
|
1−2
−30100%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 190−200
+9750%
|
2−3
−9750%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 500−550 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 153 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 114 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+5733%
|
3−4
−5733%
|
| Valorant | 450−500
+22500%
|
2−3
−22500%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 192 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 99 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 176 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 220−230
+21900%
|
1−2
−21900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 150−160 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 150−160 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 182
+1113%
|
14−16
−1113%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 76 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 152 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 300−350
+16400%
|
2−3
−16400%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 136 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 211
+21000%
|
1−2
−21000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 109 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 170−180 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 45−50 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 95−100
+9500%
|
1−2
−9500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 75−80
+3850%
|
2−3
−3850%
|
This is how RTX 3080 Ti and ATI Mobility HD 3650 compete in popular games:
- RTX 3080 Ti is 21400% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3080 Ti is 21900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RTX 3080 Ti surpassed ATI Mobility HD 3650 in all 29 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 60.77 | 0.31 |
| Recency | 31 May 2021 | 7 January 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 12 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 8 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 350 Watt | 30 Watt |
RTX 3080 Ti has a 19503.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 587.5% more advanced lithography process.
ATI Mobility HD 3650, on the other hand, has 1066.7% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3650 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce RTX 3080 Ti is a desktop graphics card while Mobility Radeon HD 3650 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
