Radeon RX Vega 3 vs HD 8650D IGP

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated779
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Power efficiencyno data13.63
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameScrapperPicasso
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date28 December 2013 (10 years ago)6 January 2019 (5 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 cores384192
Core clock speed720 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed844 MHz1001 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate20.2612.01
Floating-point processing power0.6482 TFLOPS0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs2412

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).

InterfaceIGPIGP
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memoryno 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 28 December 2013 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8650D IGP and Radeon RX Vega 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8650D IGP is a desktop card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a notebook 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8650D IGP
Radeon HD 8650D IGP
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

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.


4.3 9 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8650D IGP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2004 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 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.