Radeon R7 265 vs RX 6500 XT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX 6500 XT and Radeon R7 265, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX 6500 XT
2022
8 GB GDDR6, 107 Watt
24.80
+139%

RX 6500 XT outperforms R7 265 by a whopping 139% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking218436
Place by popularity85not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation58.375.06
Power efficiency16.164.83
ArchitectureRDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameNavi 24Pitcairn
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date19 January 2022 (2 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 1054% 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 cores10241024
Core clock speed2610 MHzno data
Boost clock speed2815 MHz925 MHz
Number of transistors5,400 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)107 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate180.259.20
Floating-point processing power5.765 TFLOPS1.894 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6464
Ray Tracing Cores16no 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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x4PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data210 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed2248 MHz1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth143.9 GB/s179.2 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 Connectors1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a2x 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 audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.65.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.21.2
Vulkan1.3-

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 24.80
+139%
R7 265 10.39

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 HD63
+163%
24−27
−163%
1440p30
+150%
12−14
−150%
4K17
+143%
7−8
−143%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.166.21
1440p6.6312.42
4K11.7121.29

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 72
+140%
30−33
−140%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+157%
21−24
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+143%
21−24
−143%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+170%
30−33
−170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Cyberpunk 2077 54
+157%
21−24
−157%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+171%
21−24
−171%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+141%
27−30
−141%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+142%
60−65
−142%
Hitman 3 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+153%
45−50
−153%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+143%
35−40
−143%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+140%
35−40
−140%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+158%
40−45
−158%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+157%
21−24
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 43
+139%
18−20
−139%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+170%
30−33
−170%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+143%
14−16
−143%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+171%
21−24
−171%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+141%
27−30
−141%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+142%
60−65
−142%
Hitman 3 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+153%
45−50
−153%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+143%
35−40
−143%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 107
+168%
40−45
−168%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+152%
21−24
−152%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+158%
40−45
−158%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+157%
21−24
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 31
+158%
12−14
−158%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+150%
12−14
−150%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+171%
21−24
−171%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+142%
60−65
−142%
Hitman 3 50−55
+178%
18−20
−178%
Horizon Zero Dawn 92
+163%
35−40
−163%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+177%
30−33
−177%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+157%
21−24
−157%
Watch Dogs: Legion 25
+150%
10−11
−150%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+167%
24−27
−167%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+161%
18−20
−161%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+171%
14−16
−171%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+160%
10−11
−160%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 23
+156%
9−10
−156%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+143%
7−8
−143%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+156%
55−60
−156%
Hitman 3 27−30
+142%
12−14
−142%
Horizon Zero Dawn 66
+144%
27−30
−144%
Metro Exodus 57
+171%
21−24
−171%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 56
+167%
21−24
−167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−33
+150%
12−14
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+155%
55−60
−155%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+156%
16−18
−156%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+140%
10−11
−140%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+171%
7−8
−171%
Hitman 3 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+154%
50−55
−154%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+180%
10−11
−180%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6
+200%
2−3
−200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+143%
14−16
−143%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 25
+150%
10−11
−150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%

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

  • RX 6500 XT is 163% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6500 XT is 150% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6500 XT is 143% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.80 10.39
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 138.7% 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.

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 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT
AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265

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.


3.8 3255 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 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.