Radeon RX 6650M vs Quadro T500 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Quadro T500 Mobile with Radeon RX 6650M, including specs and performance data.
6650M outperforms T500 Mobile by a whopping 334% 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 | 544 | 151 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 35.44 | 23.07 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Mobile workstation | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 December 2020 (4 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (3 years ago) |
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 | 896 | 1792 |
| Core clock speed | 1365 MHz | 2068 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1695 MHz | 2416 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 94.92 | 270.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.037 TFLOPS | 8.659 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 |
| TMUs | 56 | 112 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 28 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 448 KB |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 2 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 32 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 size | medium sized | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1250 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB/s | 256.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.6 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | - |
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 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.
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.
3DMark Time Spy Graphics
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 | 36
−219%
| 115
+219%
|
| 1440p | 15
−333%
| 65−70
+333%
|
| 4K | 17
−312%
| 70−75
+312%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
−460%
|
80−85
+460%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−246%
|
120−130
+246%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
−290%
|
110−120
+290%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
−5.9%
|
54
+5.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−281%
|
140−150
+281%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
−360%
|
110−120
+360%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
−460%
|
80−85
+460%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
−383%
|
140−150
+383%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−155%
|
210−220
+155%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−246%
|
120−130
+246%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
−112%
|
270−280
+112%
|
| Dota 2 | 90
−31.1%
|
118
+31.1%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28
−318%
|
110−120
+318%
|
| Fortnite | 50−55
+10.9%
|
46
−10.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−281%
|
140−150
+281%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
−360%
|
110−120
+360%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 31
−297%
|
120−130
+297%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
−460%
|
80−85
+460%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
−406%
|
86
+406%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
−383%
|
140−150
+383%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 28
−496%
|
167
+496%
|
| Valorant | 85−90
−155%
|
210−220
+155%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
−246%
|
120−130
+246%
|
| Dota 2 | 75
−33.3%
|
100
+33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 27
−333%
|
110−120
+333%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
−281%
|
140−150
+281%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14−16
−460%
|
80−85
+460%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−33
−383%
|
140−150
+383%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
−374%
|
90
+374%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 50−55
+27.5%
|
40
−27.5%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 65−70
−292%
|
250−260
+292%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 13
−477%
|
75−80
+477%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
−489%
|
50−55
+489%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
−317%
|
50−55
+317%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
−166%
|
250−260
+166%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
−400%
|
95−100
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
−418%
|
85−90
+418%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 20−22
−410%
|
100−110
+410%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
−367%
|
40−45
+367%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20
−428%
|
95−100
+428%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14
−457%
|
75−80
+457%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−725%
|
30−35
+725%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−613%
|
55−60
+613%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−407%
|
220−230
+407%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
−544%
|
55−60
+544%
|
| Dota 2 | 28
−282%
|
100−110
+282%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−488%
|
45−50
+488%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−386%
|
65−70
+386%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
−475%
|
21−24
+475%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−500%
|
45−50
+500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−475%
|
45−50
+475%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 127
+0%
|
127
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 106
+0%
|
106
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 64
+0%
|
64
+0%
|
| Valorant | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
This is how T500 Mobile and RX 6650M compete in popular games:
- RX 6650M is 219% faster in 1080p
- RX 6650M is 333% faster in 1440p
- RX 6650M is 312% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Epic Preset, the T500 Mobile is 28% faster.
- in Metro Exodus, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6650M is 725% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- T500 Mobile performs better in 2 tests (3%)
- RX 6650M performs better in 48 tests (73%)
- there's a draw in 16 tests (24%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 8.23 | 35.72 |
| Recency | 2 December 2020 | 4 January 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 120 Watt |
T500 Mobile has 566.7% lower power consumption.
RX 6650M, on the other hand, has a 334% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T500 Mobile in performance tests.
Be aware that Quadro T500 Mobile is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 6650M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
