Radeon RX 6650 XT vs Quadro NVS 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

NVS 320M
2007
512 MB GDDR3, GDDR2, 20 Watt
0.54

Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms Quadro NVS 320M by a whopping 8189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking118468
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.32
ArchitectureG8x (2007−2008)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameG84MNavi 23
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date9 June 2007 (17 years ago)10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399
Current price$66 $465 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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 cores322048
Core clock speed575 MHz2055 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2635 MHz
Number of transistors289 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt176 Watt
Texture fill rate9.200337.3
Floating-point performance73.6 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Quadro NVS 320M and Radeon RX 6650 XT compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno data2-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 typeGDDR3, GDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz17500 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s280.3 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMIno data+

API compatibility

List of supported graphics 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
CUDA1.1no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

NVS 320M 0.54
RX 6650 XT 44.76
+8189%

Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms Quadro NVS 320M by 8189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

NVS 320M 208
RX 6650 XT 17286
+8211%

Radeon RX 6650 XT outperforms Quadro NVS 320M by 8211% in Passmark.

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 HD1−2
−13400%
135
+13400%
1440p0−167
4K-0−137

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−6300%
128
+6300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 75−80
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2900%
90−95
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−5300%
108
+5300%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−10800%
100−110
+10800%
Hitman 3 2−3
−4500%
90−95
+4500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−2625%
327
+2625%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−3800%
273
+3800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−1378%
133
+1378%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 75−80
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2900%
90−95
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−4300%
88
+4300%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−10800%
100−110
+10800%
Hitman 3 2−3
−4500%
90−95
+4500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1425%
180−190
+1425%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−3071%
222
+3071%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−5967%
182
+5967%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−1067%
100−110
+1067%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 75−80
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2900%
90−95
+2900%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3800%
78
+3800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−1342%
173
+1342%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−2657%
193
+2657%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−3467%
107
+3467%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
−622%
65
+622%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1650%
70−75
+1650%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4300%
44
+4300%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−11300%
114
+11300%
Hitman 3 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−4200%
129
+4200%

1440p
Epic Preset

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

4K
High Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 55−60

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3100%
30−35
+3100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 0−1 72
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1900%
60
+1900%

4K
Epic Preset

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

This is how NVS 320M and RX 6650 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650 XT is 13400% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6650 XT is 11300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RX 6650 XT surpassed NVS 320M in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 44.76
Recency 9 June 2007 10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 176 Watt

The Radeon RX 6650 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro NVS 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro NVS 320M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6650 XT is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA Quadro NVS 320M
Quadro NVS 320M
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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate Quadro NVS 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2857 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.