Radeon R4 Graphics vs HD 8650G

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1014not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.71no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameDevastatorBeema
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)11 June 2014 (10 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 cores384128
Core clock speed533 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed720 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,303 million930 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate17.286.400
Floating-point processing power0.553 TFLOPS0.2048 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs248

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceIGPIGP
Widthno dataIGP

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 memory+no 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_0)
Shader Model5.06.3
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 May 2013 11 June 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

R4 Graphics has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8650G and Radeon R4 Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8650G is a notebook card while Radeon R4 Graphics is a desktop 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 8650G
Radeon HD 8650G
AMD Radeon R4 Graphics
Radeon R4 Graphics

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.


3.7 69 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1200 votes

Rate Radeon R4 Graphics 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.