Radeon RX 6650M vs E8950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
E8950 R9 M295X R9 M295X Mac Edition R9 M390X R9 M395X R9 M395X Mac Edition R9 M485X
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
6300M 6450M 6500 6500M 6550M 6550S 6600M 6600S 6650M 6650M XT 6700M 6700S 6800M 6800S 6850M XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon E8950 and Radeon RX 6650M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon E8950
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 95 Watt
13.00

6650M outperforms E8950 by a whopping 178% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
RX 6650M RX 6650M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking419148
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.5523.21
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameAmethystNavi 23
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 September 2015 (10 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 cores20481792
Core clock speed735 MHz2068 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz2416 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt120 Watt
Texture fill rate128.0270.6
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPS8.659 TFLOPS
ROPs3264
TMUs128112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L0 Cacheno data448 KB
L1 Cache512 KB512 KB
L2 Cache512 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
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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 HD40−45
−188%
115
+188%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 127
+0%
127
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 106
+0%
106
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 54
+0%
54
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 79
+0%
79
+0%
Dota 2 118
+0%
118
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Fortnite 46
+0%
46
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 86
+0%
86
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 167
+0%
167
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 64
+0%
64
+0%
Dota 2 100
+0%
100
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+0%
90
+0%
Valorant 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 40
+0%
40
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Dota 2 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

This is how Radeon E8950 and RX 6650M compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650M is 188% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 13.00 36.11
Recency 29 September 2015 4 January 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 120 Watt

Radeon E8950 has 26.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6650M, on the other hand, has a 177.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon E8950 in performance tests.

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.

AMD Radeon E8950
Radeon E8950
AMD Radeon RX 6650M
Radeon RX 6650M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
Apple M1 8-Core GPU M1 8 Core GPU
RX 6650M Radeon RX 6650M
vs
RTX 5050 Mobile GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
Radeon E8870 Radeon E8870
vs
RTX 2050 Mobile GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
Radeon E8870 Radeon E8870
vs
Instinct MI325X Radeon Instinct MI325X
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
GTX 950M GeForce GTX 950M
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
S7100X FirePro S7100X
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
RX 540X Radeon RX 540X
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
RTX 4080 Ti Max-Q GeForce RTX 4080 Ti Max-Q
R7 M350 Radeon R7 M350
vs
HD 7480D Radeon HD 7480D
R7 M350 Radeon R7 M350
vs
R7 350X OEM Radeon R7 350X OEM
R7 M350 Radeon R7 M350
vs
GTX 660 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 660 Rev. 2
R7 M350 Radeon R7 M350
vs
9400 GT Rev. 3 GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 3

Community ratings

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

4.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon E8950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 147 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon E8950 or Radeon RX 6650M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.