Radeon HD 7650A vs Titan X Pascal

Place in performance ranking	144	939
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	14.83	0.23
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GP102	Onega
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	25 July 2016 (7 years ago)	5 January 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	$262
Current price	$312 (0.3x MSRP)	$46 (0.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Titan X Pascal has 6348% better value for money than HD 7650A.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	3584	480
Core clock speed	1418 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1531 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	11,800 million	716 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	33 Watt
Texture fill rate	342.9	14.40
Floating-point performance	10,974 gflops	576.0 gflops

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-A (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	MXM Module
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5X	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	10000 MHz	1800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	480.4 GB/s	28.8 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no data

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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data
G-SYNC support	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.0
OpenGL	4.6	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	N/A
CUDA	+	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Titan X Pascal 33.73
+2179%

HD 7650A 1.48

Titan X Pascal outperforms Radeon HD 7650A by 2179% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Titan X Pascal 13026
+2185%

HD 7650A 570

Titan X Pascal outperforms Radeon HD 7650A by 2185% in Passmark.

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	124 +2380%	5−6 −2380%
1440p	73 +2333%	3−4 −2333%
4K	58 +2800%	2−3 −2800%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

1800−1850

+2178%

79
−2178%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2350−2400 +2160%	104 −2160%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2150−2200 +2163%	95 −2163%
Battlefield 5	3950−4000 +2170%	174 −2170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2450−2500 +2169%	108 −2169%
Cyberpunk 2077	1750−1800 +2144%	78 −2144%
Far Cry 5	2750−2800 +2173%	121 −2173%
Far Cry New Dawn	3100−3150 +2146%	138 −2146%
Forza Horizon 4	2850−2900 +2144%	127 −2144%
Hitman 3	2350−2400 +2160%	104 −2160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6250−6300 +2173%	275 −2173%
Metro Exodus	3250−3300 +2173%	143 −2173%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2800−2850 +2140%	125 −2140%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5700−5750 +2171%	251 −2171%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2350−2400 +2160%	104 −2160%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1950−2000 +2141%	87 −2141%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1900−1950 +2135%	85 −2135%
Battlefield 5	3750−3800 +2173%	165 −2173%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2200−2250 +2145%	98 −2145%
Cyberpunk 2077	1550−1600 +2146%	69 −2146%
Far Cry 5	2050−2100 +2128%	92 −2128%
Far Cry New Dawn	2450−2500 +2169%	108 −2169%
Forza Horizon 4	5100−5150 +2167%	225 −2167%
Hitman 3	1900−1950 +2162%	84 −2162%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6250−6300 +2173%	275 −2173%
Metro Exodus	3200−3250 +2154%	142 −2154%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2700−2750 +2150%	120 −2150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4400−4450 +2168%	194 −2168%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4150−4200 +2155%	184 −2155%
Watch Dogs: Legion	4900−4950 +2169%	216 −2169%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1500−1550 +2139%	67 −2139%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1400−1450 +2122%	63 −2122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1700−1750 +2167%	75 −2167%
Cyberpunk 2077	1300−1350 +2103%	59 −2103%
Far Cry 5	1500−1550 +2139%	67 −2139%
Forza Horizon 4	2550−2600 +2177%	112 −2177%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3400−3450 +2167%	150 −2167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	3800−3850 +2175%	167 −2175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2150−2200 +2163%	95 −2163%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1450−1500 +2166%	64 −2166%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2650−2700
+2146%

118

−2146%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1450−1500 +2166%	60−65 −2166%
Far Cry New Dawn	2550−2600 +2157%	113 −2157%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	800−850 +2122%	35−40 −2122%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1150−1200 +2155%	51 −2155%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2100−2150 +2134%	94 −2134%
Cyberpunk 2077	850−900 +2137%	38 −2137%
Far Cry 5	2300−2350 +2177%	101 −2177%
Forza Horizon 4	1550−1600 +2146%	65−70 −2146%
Hitman 3	1500−1550 +2173%	66 −2173%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2650−2700 +2146%	118 −2146%
Metro Exodus	2300−2350 +2177%	101 −2177%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2750−2800 +2154%	122 −2154%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1000−1050 +2074%	45−50 −2074%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1000−1050 +2074%	46 −2074%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2050−2100

+2128%

92
−2128%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1400−1450 +2122%	63 −2122%
Far Cry New Dawn	1050−1100 +2088%	48 −2088%
Hitman 3	850−900 +2079%	39 −2079%
Horizon Zero Dawn	900−950 +2095%	40−45 −2095%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	950−1000 +2162%	42 −2162%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1500−1550 +2106%	68 −2106%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	850−900 +2137%	38 −2137%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	700−750 +2088%	32 −2088%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	750−800 +2106%	34 −2106%
Cyberpunk 2077	400−450 +2122%	18 −2122%
Far Cry 5	750−800 +2173%	33 −2173%
Forza Horizon 4	1650−1700 +2160%	73 −2160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1550−1600 +2114%	70 −2114%
Metro Exodus	1250−1300 +2132%	56 −2132%
Watch Dogs: Legion	550−600 +2015%	26 −2015%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1050−1100

+2134%

47
−2134%

This is how Titan X Pascal and HD 7650A compete in popular games:

Titan X Pascal is 2380% faster in 1080p
Titan X Pascal is 2333% faster in 1440p
Titan X Pascal is 2800% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.73	1.48
Recency	25 July 2016	5 January 2012
Cost	$1199	$262
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	33 Watt