Radeon RX 6650M XT vs Quadro FX 5800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro FX 5800 with Radeon RX 6650M XT, including specs and performance data.


FX 5800
2008, $3,499
4 GB GDDR3, 189 Watt
2.89

6650M XT outperforms FX 5800 by a whopping 1312% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking823113
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency1.1826.19
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGT200BNavi 23
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date11 November 2008 (17 years ago)4 January 2022 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$3,499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores2402048
Core clock speed610 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2416 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)189 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate48.80309.2
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS9.896 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs80128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L0 Cacheno data512 KB
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cache256 KB2 MB
L3 Cacheno data32 MB

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth102.4 GB/s256.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x DisplayPort, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.3-

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.

FX 5800 2.89
RX 6650M XT 40.82
+1312%

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.

FX 5800 1210
Samples: 142
RX 6650M XT 16081
+1229%
Samples: 3

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Dota 2 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Far Cry 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.89 40.82
Recency 11 November 2008 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 189 Watt 120 Watt

RX 6650M XT has a 1312% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 686% more advanced lithography process, and 58% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6650M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 5800 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 5800 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6650M XT 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.

Community ratings

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


3.9 27 votes

Rate Quadro FX 5800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 79 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro FX 5800 or Radeon RX 6650M XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.