Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano vs HD 8650G

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1098not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.61no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameDevastatorVega 10
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 May 2013 (12 years ago)1 October 2017 (8 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 cores3844096
Core clock speed533 MHz1156 MHz
Boost clock speed720 MHz1247 MHz
Number of transistors1,303 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate17.28319.2
Floating-point processing power0.553 TFLOPSno data
ROPs864
TMUs24256

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
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data152 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeSystem SharedHBM2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared2048 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1600 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data409.6 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12.0
Shader Model5.05.0
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.0
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 May 2013 1 October 2017
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 250 Watt

HD 8650G has 614.3% lower power consumption.

RX Vega 64 Nano, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8650G and Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8650G is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano is a desktop one.

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 RX Vega 64 Nano
Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano

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.


3.4 100 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 5 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 8650G or Radeon RX Vega 64 Nano, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.