Radeon RX 6950 XT vs ATI HD 3650 AGP

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 3650 AGP and Radeon RX 6950 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI HD 3650 AGP
2008
512 MB DDR2, 65 Watt
0.36

6950 XT outperforms HD 3650 AGP by a whopping 18564% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking134325
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data33.77
Power efficiency0.4315.44
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameRV635Navi 21
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 January 2008 (18 years ago)10 May 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,099

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 cores1205120
Core clock speed725 MHz1925 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2324 MHz
Number of transistors378 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt335 Watt
Texture fill rate5.800743.7
Floating-point processing power0.174 TFLOPS23.8 TFLOPS
ROPs4128
TMUs8320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80
L0 Cacheno data1.3 MB
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cache128 KB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 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).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Width1-slot3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsFloppy2x 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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
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 S-Video1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

ATI HD 3650 AGP 0.36
RX 6950 XT 67.19
+18564%

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.

ATI HD 3650 AGP 150
Samples: 66
RX 6950 XT 28104
+18636%
Samples: 3505

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
−21700%
218
+21700%
1440p0−1133
4K-0−184

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.04
1440pno data8.26
4Kno data13.08

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 351
+0%
351
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 161
+0%
161
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 349
+0%
349
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 339
+0%
339
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 143
+0%
143
+0%
Far Cry 5 181
+0%
181
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 237
+0%
237
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 318
+0%
318
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 128
+0%
128
+0%
Dota 2 199
+0%
199
+0%
Far Cry 5 173
+0%
173
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 229
+0%
229
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 172
+0%
172
+0%
Metro Exodus 189
+0%
189
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 376
+0%
376
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 122
+0%
122
+0%
Dota 2 167
+0%
167
+0%
Far Cry 5 164
+0%
164
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 216
+0%
216
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 236
+0%
236
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 153
+0%
153
+0%
Metro Exodus 120
+0%
120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+0%
93
+0%
Far Cry 5 163
+0%
163
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 58
+0%
58
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 174
+0%
174
+0%
Metro Exodus 77
+0%
77
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 144
+0%
144
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Dota 2 141
+0%
141
+0%
Far Cry 5 124
+0%
124
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how ATI HD 3650 AGP and RX 6950 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6950 XT is 21700% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.36 67.19
Recency 23 January 2008 10 May 2022
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 335 Watt

ATI HD 3650 AGP has 415.4% lower power consumption.

RX 6950 XT, on the other hand, has a 18563.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 685.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6950 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 3650 AGP 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.


ATI Radeon HD 3650 AGP
Radeon HD 3650 AGP
AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT
Radeon RX 6950 XT

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 28 votes

Rate Radeon HD 3650 AGP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2975 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6950 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 3650 AGP or Radeon RX 6950 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.