ATI Radeon X1650 vs RX 480

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 480 and Radeon X1650, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 480
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
22.33
+12306%

RX 480 outperforms ATI X1650 by a whopping 12306% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2471397
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation15.78no data
Power efficiency10.38no data
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameEllesmereRV516
GCN generation4th Genno data
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date29 June 2016 (8 years ago)20 November 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$229 no data

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 cores2304no data
Compute units36no data
Core clock speed1120 MHz635 MHz
Boost clock speed1266 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,700 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Wattno data
Texture fill rate182.32.540
Floating-point processing power5.834 TFLOPSno data
ROPs324
TMUs1444

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 supportn/ano data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz392 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s6.272 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
HDMI2.0-
DisplayPort support1.4HDR-

Supported technologies

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

AppAccelerationn/a-
CrossFire+-
Enduron/a-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3Dn/a-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudion/a-
ZeroCore+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 129.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.43.0
OpenGL4.52.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A
Mantlen/a-

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 480 22.33
+12306%
ATI X1650 0.18

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.

RX 480 8613
+12031%
ATI X1650 71

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 HD770−1
1440p44-0−1
4K35-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.97no data
1440p5.20no data
4K6.54no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 58 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 70−75 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+13300%
1−2
−13300%
Hitman 3 40−45 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 0−1
Metro Exodus 93 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 110 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 93 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Battlefield 5 48 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 50−55 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 31 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 130−140
+13300%
1−2
−13300%
Hitman 3 40−45 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 0−1
Metro Exodus 78 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 77 0−1
Hitman 3 40−45 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75−80 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 44 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 42 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 0−1
Far Cry 5 30 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+12500%
1−2
−12500%
Hitman 3 24−27 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50 0−1
Metro Exodus 50 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+12800%
1−2
−12800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 31 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 21 0−1
Hitman 3 16−18 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 60 0−1
Metro Exodus 25 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 0−1
Far Cry 5 15 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 22.33 0.18
Recency 29 June 2016 20 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 80 nm

RX 480 has a 12305.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon RX 480
Radeon RX 480
ATI Radeon X1650
Radeon X1650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.2 1824 votes

Rate Radeon RX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.