Radeon RX 6650M XT vs HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics and Radeon RX 6650M XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
6650M XT outperforms HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics by a whopping 2106% 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 | 960 | 113 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 26.19 |
| Architecture | no data | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | no data | Navi 23 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 August 2013 (12 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (4 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 | 768 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 720 / 650 MHz | 2068 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2416 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 11,060 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 309.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 9.896 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 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 | no data | 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 | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 - 2000 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 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 data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
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 HD | 13
−2054%
| 280−290
+2054%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−11200%
|
220−230
+11200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2325%
|
95−100
+2325%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2
−11200%
|
110−120
+11200%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−3325%
|
130−140
+3325%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−11200%
|
220−230
+11200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2325%
|
95−100
+2325%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−3175%
|
130−140
+3175%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1490%
|
150−160
+1490%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−4233%
|
130−140
+4233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1345%
|
150−160
+1345%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−521%
|
230−240
+521%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−3325%
|
130−140
+3325%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−11200%
|
220−230
+11200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 31
−800%
|
270−280
+800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2325%
|
95−100
+2325%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−595%
|
140−150
+595%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−3175%
|
130−140
+3175%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1490%
|
150−160
+1490%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−4233%
|
130−140
+4233%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−4367%
|
130−140
+4367%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−3200%
|
95−100
+3200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1345%
|
150−160
+1345%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1775%
|
150−160
+1775%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−521%
|
230−240
+521%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−3325%
|
130−140
+3325%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−2325%
|
95−100
+2325%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−595%
|
140−150
+595%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−3175%
|
130−140
+3175%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1490%
|
150−160
+1490%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1345%
|
150−160
+1345%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1775%
|
150−160
+1775%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−521%
|
230−240
+521%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−2020%
|
100−110
+2020%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−2131%
|
290−300
+2131%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−821%
|
170−180
+821%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−2125%
|
260−270
+2125%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−4800%
|
45−50
+4800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−3267%
|
100−110
+3267%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2280%
|
110−120
+2280%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−2567%
|
80−85
+2567%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−3567%
|
110−120
+3567%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−557%
|
90−95
+557%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−2689%
|
250−260
+2689%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−2775%
|
110−120
+2775%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 55−60 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 80−85 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1833%
|
55−60
+1833%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1733%
|
55−60
+1733%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+0%
|
65−70
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
This is how HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics and RX 6650M XT compete in popular games:
- RX 6650M XT is 2054% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6650M XT is 11200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 6650M XT performs better in 49 tests (84%)
- there's a draw in 9 tests (16%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.85 | 40.82 |
| Recency | 1 August 2013 | 4 January 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
RX 6650M XT has a 2106% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6650M XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
