Radeon HD 6470M vs HD 8650M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8650M and Radeon HD 6470M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD 8650M outperforms HD 6470M by a whopping 243% 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 | 955 | 1281 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GCN (2012−2015) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | no data | Seymour |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2013 (13 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $569.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 900 Million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 5.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.224 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 16 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
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 |
| 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 | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 4500 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 12.8 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
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:
| 900p | 30−35
+200%
| 10
−200%
|
| Full HD | 40−45
+208%
| 13
−208%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 43.85 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+35.7%
|
27−30
−35.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
+117%
|
18−20
−117%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+90.9%
|
10−12
−90.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+35.7%
|
27−30
−35.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
+90.9%
|
10−12
−90.9%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+35.7%
|
27−30
−35.7%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+217%
|
6−7
−217%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
This is how HD 8650M and HD 6470M compete in popular games:
- HD 8650M is 200% faster in 900p
- HD 8650M is 208% faster in 1080p
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 550% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 8650M performs better in 30 tests (97%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (3%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.85 | 0.54 |
| Recency | 7 January 2013 | 4 January 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
HD 8650M has a 242.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon HD 8650M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6470M 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.
