Radeon R7 265 vs RX 6500 XT

Place in the ranking	227	440
Place by popularity	95	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	58.26	5.25
Power efficiency	16.00	4.80
Architecture	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	Navi 24	Pitcairn
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	19 January 2022 (3 years ago)	13 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6500 XT has 1010% better value for money than R7 265.

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	1024	1024
Core clock speed	2610 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	2815 MHz	925 MHz
Number of transistors	5,400 million	2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	107 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	180.2	59.20
Floating-point processing power	5.765 TFLOPS	1.894 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	64
Ray Tracing Cores	16	no 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).

Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 4.0 x4	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	210 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1 x 6-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 type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2248 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	143.9 GB/s	179.2 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	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	+	+

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	-	+
FreeSync	-	+
DDMA audio	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.6	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX 6500 XT 24.55
+138%

R7 265 10.32

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

RX 6500 XT 15712
+201%

R7 265 5220

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:

Full HD	64 +167%	24−27 −167%
1440p	30 +150%	12−14 −150%
4K	16 +167%	6−7 −167%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.11 +99.7%	6.21 −99.7%
1440p	6.63 +87.2%	12.42 −87.2%
4K	12.44 +99.7%	24.83 −99.7%

RX 6500 XT has 100% lower cost per frame in 1080p
RX 6500 XT has 87% lower cost per frame in 1440p
RX 6500 XT has 100% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	64 +167%	24−27 −167%
Cyberpunk 2077	72 +140%	30−33 −140%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +153%	30−33 −153%
Counter-Strike 2	40 +150%	16−18 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	27 +170%	10−11 −170%
Forza Horizon 4	128 +156%	50−55 −156%
Forza Horizon 5	66 +144%	27−30 −144%
Metro Exodus	97 +143%	40−45 −143%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +157%	21−24 −157%
Valorant	100−105 +150%	40−45 −150%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +153%	30−33 −153%
Counter-Strike 2	28 +180%	10−11 −180%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 +143%	7−8 −143%
Dota 2	106 +165%	40−45 −165%
Far Cry 5	43 +139%	18−20 −139%
Fortnite	120−130 +150%	50−55 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	107 +168%	40−45 −168%
Forza Horizon 5	35 +150%	14−16 −150%
Grand Theft Auto V	86 +146%	35−40 −146%
Metro Exodus	62 +158%	24−27 −158%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +140%	65−70 −140%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55 +157%	21−24 −157%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	80−85 +170%	30−33 −170%
Valorant	100−105 +150%	40−45 −150%
World of Tanks	250−260 +157%	100−105 −157%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80 +153%	30−33 −153%
Counter-Strike 2	24 +140%	10−11 −140%
Cyberpunk 2077	15 +150%	6−7 −150%
Dota 2	110 +144%	45−50 −144%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +153%	30−33 −153%
Forza Horizon 4	83 +177%	30−33 −177%
Forza Horizon 5	47 +161%	18−20 −161%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +140%	65−70 −140%
Valorant	100−105 +150%	40−45 −150%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	37 +164%	14−16 −164%
Grand Theft Auto V	37 +164%	14−16 −164%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +150%	70−75 −150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24 +156%	9−10 −156%
World of Tanks	160−170 +154%	65−70 −154%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +138%	21−24 −138%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +200%	3−4 −200%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +140%	30−33 −140%
Forza Horizon 4	56 +167%	21−24 −167%
Forza Horizon 5	23 +156%	9−10 −156%
Metro Exodus	57 +171%	21−24 −171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +164%	14−16 −164%
Valorant	65−70 +148%	27−30 −148%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Dota 2	34 +143%	14−16 −143%
Grand Theft Auto V	34 +143%	14−16 −143%
Metro Exodus	11 +175%	4−5 −175%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80 +153%	30−33 −153%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	34 +143%	14−16 −143%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +160%	10−11 −160%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +150%	4−5 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	2	0−1
Dota 2	67 +148%	27−30 −148%
Far Cry 5	30−35 +175%	12−14 −175%
Fortnite	30−35 +158%	12−14 −158%
Forza Horizon 4	25 +150%	10−11 −150%
Forza Horizon 5	3 +200%	1−2 −200%
Valorant	30−35 +167%	12−14 −167%

This is how RX 6500 XT and R7 265 compete in popular games:

RX 6500 XT is 167% faster in 1080p
RX 6500 XT is 150% faster in 1440p
RX 6500 XT is 167% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.55	10.32
Recency	19 January 2022	13 February 2014
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	6 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	107 Watt	150 Watt

RX 6500 XT has a 137.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 40.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 265 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.