Radeon RX 8050S vs HD 6450 GDDR5
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6450 GDDR5 with Radeon RX 8050S, including specs and performance data.
8050S outperforms HD 6450 GDDR5 by a whopping 3936% 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 | 1191 | 155 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.54 | no data |
| Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | no data |
| GPU code name | Caicos | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 April 2011 (14 years ago) | 6 January 2025 (1 year 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 | 160 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 750 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | no data |
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 | GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | no data |
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 Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.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 Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
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:
| 900p | 7
−3900%
| 280−290
+3900%
|
| Full HD | 15
−527%
| 94
+527%
|
| 1200p | 5
−3900%
| 200−210
+3900%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4100%
|
80−85
+4100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4100%
|
80−85
+4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−9900%
|
100
+9900%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−15800%
|
150−160
+15800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−2233%
|
140−150
+2233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1713%
|
140−150
+1713%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−620%
|
210−220
+620%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 29
−859%
|
270−280
+859%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4100%
|
80−85
+4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−3829%
|
550−600
+3829%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−9500%
|
96
+9500%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−15800%
|
150−160
+15800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−2233%
|
140−150
+2233%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 110−120 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−8500%
|
85−90
+8500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1713%
|
140−150
+1713%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−2500%
|
156
+2500%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−620%
|
210−220
+620%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4100%
|
80−85
+4100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−3829%
|
550−600
+3829%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−8400%
|
85
+8400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−2233%
|
140−150
+2233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1713%
|
140−150
+1713%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1433%
|
92
+1433%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−3900%
|
1200−1250
+3900%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−15800%
|
150−160
+15800%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−2125%
|
85−90
+2125%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
−5000%
|
250−260
+5000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−3789%
|
350−400
+3789%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 40−45 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 85−90 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−5000%
|
100−110
+5000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−3250%
|
65−70
+3250%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−9400%
|
95−100
+9400%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−457%
|
75−80
+457%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−5450%
|
220−230
+5450%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2250%
|
45−50
+2250%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2200%
|
45−50
+2200%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+0%
|
200−210
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 118
+0%
|
118
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 120−130
+0%
|
120−130
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 90−95
+0%
|
90−95
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+0%
|
18−20
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
This is how HD 6450 GDDR5 and RX 8050S compete in popular games:
- RX 8050S is 3900% faster in 900p
- RX 8050S is 527% faster in 1080p
- RX 8050S is 3900% faster in 1200p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 8050S is 15800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 8050S performs better in 31 tests (62%)
- there's a draw in 19 tests (38%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.89 | 35.92 |
| Recency | 18 April 2011 | 6 January 2025 |
RX 8050S has a 3936% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 13 years.
The Radeon RX 8050S is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6450 GDDR5 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6450 GDDR5 is a desktop graphics card while Radeon RX 8050S 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.
