GeForce 610M vs Radeon HD 8650M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8650M and GeForce 610M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 8650M outperforms 610M by a whopping 170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 893 | 1167 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 4.34 |
| Architecture | GCN (2012−2015) | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | no data | GF119 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2013 (12 years ago) | 1 December 2011 (13 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 | 384 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 738 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 900 Million | 292 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 12 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 5.904 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.1417 TFLOPS |
| Video decoders | no data | H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
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 | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | Up to 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | Up to 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 | 12 API |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+34.5%
|
27−30
−34.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+95%
|
20−22
−95%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+61.5%
|
12−14
−61.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+34.5%
|
27−30
−34.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+61.5%
|
12−14
−61.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+34.5%
|
27−30
−34.5%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+333%
|
3−4
−333%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8650M is 333% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 8650M is ahead in 35 tests (97%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.05 | 0.76 |
| Recency | 7 January 2013 | 1 December 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
HD 8650M has a 169.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon HD 8650M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 610M 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.
