Radeon RX 6650 XT vs HD Graphics 505

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 505 and Radeon RX 6650 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 505
2016
8 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4, 10 Watt
0.94

RX 6650 XT outperforms HD Graphics 505 by a whopping 4644% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking111878
Place by popularitynot in top-10097
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data62.38
Power efficiency10.8317.51
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameApollo Lake GT1.5Navi 23
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 September 2016 (8 years ago)10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1442048
Core clock speed200 MHz2055 MHz
Boost clock speed650 MHz2635 MHz
Number of transistors189 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt176 Watt
Texture fill rate11.70337.3
Floating-point processing power0.1872 TFLOPS10.79 TFLOPS
ROPs364
TMUs18128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 4.0 x8
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2190 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data280.3 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.1
Vulkan1.31.3

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. 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.

HD Graphics 505 0.94
RX 6650 XT 44.59
+4644%

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.

HD Graphics 505 361
RX 6650 XT 17206
+4666%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD Graphics 505 620
RX 6650 XT 41739
+6632%

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.

HD Graphics 505 2351
RX 6650 XT 105955
+4408%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD Graphics 505 408
RX 6650 XT 29796
+7203%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD Graphics 505 3414
RX 6650 XT 167944
+4820%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD Graphics 505 32481
RX 6650 XT 451929
+1291%

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 HD9
−1478%
142
+1478%
1440p1−2
−7000%
71
+7000%
4K0−136

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.81
1440pno data5.62
4Kno data11.08

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−4167%
128
+4167%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−1780%
90−95
+1780%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3500%
108
+3500%
Far Cry 5 0−1 90−95
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5350%
100−110
+5350%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1820%
95−100
+1820%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1408%
180−190
+1408%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9900%
100−105
+9900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−2300%
160−170
+2300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−339%
130−140
+339%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−1780%
90−95
+1780%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2833%
88
+2833%
Far Cry 5 0−1 90−95
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−5350%
100−110
+5350%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1820%
95−100
+1820%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1408%
180−190
+1408%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9900%
100−105
+9900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−3071%
222
+3071%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−820%
90−95
+820%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−339%
130−140
+339%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−1780%
90−95
+1780%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2867%
85−90
+2867%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2500%
78
+2500%
Far Cry 5 0−1 90−95
Hitman 3 5−6
−1820%
95−100
+1820%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1342%
173
+1342%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−2657%
193
+2657%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−970%
107
+970%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−110%
65
+110%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−9900%
100−105
+9900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 85−90
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6800%
65−70
+6800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 45−50
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4300%
44
+4300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5100%
50−55
+5100%
Hitman 3 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−3125%
129
+3125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 65−70
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
−6767%
200−210
+6767%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2467%
75−80
+2467%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 35−40

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3100%
30−35
+3100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 27−30
Far Cry 5 0−1 27−30

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1950%
40−45
+1950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Metro Exodus 114
+0%
114
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 124
+0%
124
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Hitman 3 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 64
+0%
64
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 23
+0%
23
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 505 and RX 6650 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650 XT is 1478% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6650 XT is 7000% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6650 XT is 9900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6650 XT is ahead in 38 tests (60%)
  • there's a draw in 25 tests (40%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.94 44.59
Recency 1 September 2016 10 May 2022
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 176 Watt

HD Graphics 505 has 1660% lower power consumption.

RX 6650 XT, on the other hand, has a 4643.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6650 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 505 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel HD Graphics 505
HD Graphics 505
AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT
Radeon RX 6650 XT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 255 votes

Rate HD Graphics 505 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 3286 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.