Radeon HD 8650M vs HD 6650M

Place in the ranking	905	885
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code name	Whistler	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 January 2011 (14 years ago)	7 January 2013 (12 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 cores	480	384
Core clock speed	600 MHz	650 MHz
Number of transistors	716 million	900 Million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Texture fill rate	14.40	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.576 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	no data
TMUs	24	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).

Laptop size	medium sized	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	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	DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	no data
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

No outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	11.1
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
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	19 +5.6%	18−20 −5.6%
Full HD	17 +6.3%	16−18 −6.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Elden Ring	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Elden Ring	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	35−40 −2.6%	35−40 +2.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −5.3%	20−22 +5.3%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
World of Tanks	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	0−1	1−2
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Fortnite	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

This is how HD 6650M and HD 8650M compete in popular games:

HD 6650M is 6% faster in 900p
HD 6650M is 6% 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 HD 8650M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 8650M is ahead in 8 tests (16%)
there's a draw in 41 test (84%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.95	2.05
Recency	4 January 2011	7 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	2 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm

HD 8650M has a 5.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 6650M and Radeon HD 8650M.

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