Radeon HD 7650A vs GeForce GTX 960M

Place in the ranking	489	984
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.11
Power efficiency	8.14	3.13
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code name	GM107	Onega
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	13 March 2015 (9 years ago)	5 January 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$262

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	640	480
Core clock speed	1096 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1176 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	716 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	33 Watt
Texture fill rate	47.04	14.40
Floating-point processing power	1.505 TFLOPS	0.576 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	40	24

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	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	MXM-A (3.0)
SLI options	+	-

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	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 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	No outputs	No outputs
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-
Ansel	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.0
OpenGL	4.5	4.4
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	-

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.

GTX 960M 8.75
+491%

HD 7650A 1.48

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 960M 3374
+493%

HD 7650A 569

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	95 +494%	16−18 −494%
Full HD	34 +580%	5−6 −580%
1440p	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
4K	14 +600%	2−3 −600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	52.40
1440p	no data	131.00
4K	no data	131.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

+600%

2−3
−600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25 +525%	4−5 −525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Battlefield 5	30 +500%	5−6 −500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Far Cry 5	28 +600%	4−5 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	31 +520%	5−6 −520%
Forza Horizon 4	84 +500%	14−16 −500%
Hitman 3	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +525%	8−9 −525%
Metro Exodus	31 +520%	5−6 −520%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	48 +500%	8−9 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +556%	9−10 −556%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +520%	5−6 −520%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Battlefield 5	23 +667%	3−4 −667%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Far Cry 5	24 +500%	4−5 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	23 +667%	3−4 −667%
Forza Horizon 4	71 +492%	12−14 −492%
Hitman 3	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +525%	8−9 −525%
Metro Exodus	26 +550%	4−5 −550%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	73 +508%	12−14 −508%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +556%	9−10 −556%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	11 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Far Cry 5	18 +500%	3−4 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	25 +525%	4−5 −525%
Hitman 3	16−18 +750%	2−3 −750%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +525%	8−9 −525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 +625%	4−5 −625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +556%	9−10 −556%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

+500%

4−5
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Far Cry New Dawn	15 +650%	2−3 −650%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8 +700%	1−2 −700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	10 +900%	1−2 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	45 +543%	7−8 −543%
Hitman 3	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Metro Exodus	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +522%	9−10 −522%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

+650%

2−3
−650%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
Far Cry New Dawn	7 +600%	1−2 −600%
Hitman 3	5−6	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +600%	5−6 −600%
Metro Exodus	8 +700%	1−2 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10 +900%	1−2 −900%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10
+800%

1−2

−800%

This is how GTX 960M and HD 7650A compete in popular games:

GTX 960M is 494% faster in 900p
GTX 960M is 580% faster in 1080p
GTX 960M is 650% faster in 1440p
GTX 960M is 600% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.75	1.48
Recency	13 March 2015	5 January 2012
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	33 Watt

GTX 960M has a 491.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 7650A, on the other hand, has 127.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7650A in performance tests.

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