GeForce GT 650M SLI vs Radeon R9 M265X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 M265X and GeForce GT 650M SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.


R9 M265X
2014
4 GB GDDR5
2.80

650M SLI outperforms R9 M265X by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking842695
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameVenusN13E-GE
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date21 March 2014 (12 years ago)22 March 2012 (14 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 cores640768
Compute units10no data
Core clock speed575 MHz790 MHz
Boost clock speed625 MHz835 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Texture fill rate25.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.8 TFLOPSno data
ROPs16no data
TMUs40no data
L1 Cache160 KBno data
L2 Cache256 KBno data

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 sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2x2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/sno data
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 outputsno data
Eyefinity+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
Optimus-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1111
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCLNot Listedno data
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

R9 M265X 2.80
GT 650M SLI 4.66
+66.4%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R9 M265X 2633
GT 650M SLI 3597
+36.6%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R9 M265X 10547
GT 650M SLI 12812
+21.5%

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:

900p45−50
−75.6%
79
+75.6%
Full HD25
−100%
50
+100%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Fortnite 14−16
−86.7%
27−30
+86.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
Valorant 45−50
−31.1%
55−60
+31.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−133%
21−24
+133%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
−157%
139
+157%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Dota 2 27−30
−46.4%
40−45
+46.4%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Fortnite 14−16
−86.7%
27−30
+86.7%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
Forza Horizon 5 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Valorant 45−50
−31.1%
55−60
+31.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
−111%
18−20
+111%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%
Dota 2 27−30
−46.4%
40−45
+46.4%
Far Cry 5 8−9
−75%
14−16
+75%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
−57.1%
21−24
+57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−38.5%
18−20
+38.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Valorant 45−50
−31.1%
55−60
+31.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
−86.7%
27−30
+86.7%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−71.4%
35−40
+71.4%
Metro Exodus 0−1 3−4
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−34.6%
35−40
+34.6%
Valorant 24−27
−96.2%
50−55
+96.2%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
−80%
9−10
+80%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 14−16
−64.3%
21−24
+64.3%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Dota 2 8−9
−100%
16−18
+100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how R9 M265X and GT 650M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GT 650M SLI is 76% faster in 900p
  • GT 650M SLI is 100% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 650M SLI is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 650M SLI performs better in 51 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.80 4.66
Recency 21 March 2014 22 March 2012

R9 M265X has an age advantage of 1 year.

GT 650M SLI, on the other hand, has a 66% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 650M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M265X 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 17 votes

Rate Radeon R9 M265X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 28 votes

Rate GeForce GT 650M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 M265X or GeForce GT 650M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.