Radeon RX 6650 XT vs RX Vega 64

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 64 and Radeon RX 6650 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 64
2017
8 GB HBM2, 295 Watt
37.05

RX 6650 XT outperforms RX Vega 64 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12778
Place by popularitynot in top-10098
Cost-effectiveness evaluation22.9362.46
Power efficiency8.7617.67
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameVega 10Navi 23
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 August 2017 (7 years ago)10 May 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $399

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6650 XT has 172% better value for money than RX Vega 64.

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 cores40962048
Core clock speed1247 MHz2055 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz2635 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million11,060 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt176 Watt
Texture fill rate395.8337.3
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPS10.79 TFLOPS
ROPs6464
TMUs256128
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pin1x 8-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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz2190 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s280.3 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, 3x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.3

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 Vega 64 37.05
RX 6650 XT 44.60
+20.4%

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 Vega 64 14294
RX 6650 XT 17205
+20.4%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 64 30824
RX 6650 XT 41739
+35.4%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RX Vega 64 55262
RX 6650 XT 105955
+91.7%

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 Vega 64 22501
RX 6650 XT 29796
+32.4%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 64 127374
RX 6650 XT 167944
+31.9%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 64 392304
RX 6650 XT 451929
+15.2%

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 HD117
−19.7%
140
+19.7%
1440p74
+12.1%
66
−12.1%
4K50
+35.1%
37
−35.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.262.85
1440p6.746.05
4K9.9810.78

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
−96.9%
128
+96.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 81
−16%
90−95
+16%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 83
+7.8%
75−80
−7.8%
Battlefield 5 186
+30.1%
140−150
−30.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 68
−30.9%
85−90
+30.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
−66.2%
108
+66.2%
Far Cry 5 112
+19.1%
90−95
−19.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
−0.9%
100−110
+0.9%
Forza Horizon 4 321
+58.1%
200−210
−58.1%
Hitman 3 84
−14.3%
95−100
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 315
+74%
180−190
−74%
Metro Exodus 144
+5.1%
130−140
−5.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 116
+16%
100−105
−16%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 178
+6%
160−170
−6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 261
+91.9%
130−140
−91.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 158
+68.1%
90−95
−68.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 69
−11.6%
75−80
+11.6%
Battlefield 5 170
+18.9%
140−150
−18.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65
−36.9%
85−90
+36.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
−35.4%
88
+35.4%
Far Cry 5 86
−9.3%
90−95
+9.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 93
−17.2%
100−110
+17.2%
Forza Horizon 4 294
+44.8%
200−210
−44.8%
Hitman 3 81
−18.5%
95−100
+18.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 293
+61.9%
180−190
−61.9%
Metro Exodus 132
−3.8%
130−140
+3.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 96
−4.2%
100−105
+4.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 164
−35.4%
222
+35.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
−19.5%
90−95
+19.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 247
+81.6%
130−140
−81.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 51
−84.3%
90−95
+84.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60
−28.3%
75−80
+28.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 54
−64.8%
85−90
+64.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70
−20%
78
+20%
Far Cry 5 67
−40.3%
90−95
+40.3%
Forza Horizon 4 128
−58.6%
200−210
+58.6%
Hitman 3 73
−31.5%
95−100
+31.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100
−73%
173
+73%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 143
−35%
193
+35%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 77
−39%
107
+39%
Watch Dogs: Legion 54
−20.4%
65
+20.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 89
−12.4%
100−105
+12.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
−23.9%
85−90
+23.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
−21.1%
65−70
+21.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45
−22.5%
45−50
+22.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
−8.5%
50−55
+8.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45
−17.8%
50−55
+17.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
−51.7%
44
+51.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
−20.9%
50−55
+20.9%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
−14.7%
240−250
+14.7%
Hitman 3 50
−20%
60−65
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80
−61.3%
129
+61.3%
Metro Exodus 79
−44.3%
114
+44.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100
−24%
124
+24%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
−28.3%
65−70
+28.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 243
+18%
200−210
−18%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 62
−24.2%
75−80
+24.2%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+28.3%
45−50
−28.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 36
−8.3%
35−40
+8.3%
Hitman 3 38
+2.7%
35−40
−2.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 102
−92.2%
190−200
+92.2%
Metro Exodus 52
−13.5%
55−60
+13.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48
−16.7%
56
+16.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 29
−10.3%
30−35
+10.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 28
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 25
−20%
30−33
+20%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−50%
18
+50%
Far Cry 5 27
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 66
+4.8%
60−65
−4.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 59
−8.5%
64
+8.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
−9.5%
23
+9.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 31
−32.3%
40−45
+32.3%

This is how RX Vega 64 and RX 6650 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6650 XT is 20% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 64 is 12% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 64 is 35% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 64 is 92% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RX 6650 XT is 97% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 64 is ahead in 18 tests (25%)
  • RX 6650 XT is ahead in 53 tests (74%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 37.05 44.60
Recency 7 August 2017 10 May 2022
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 176 Watt

RX 6650 XT has a 20.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 67.6% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6650 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 64 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 Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT
Radeon RX 6650 XT

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.


4.3 692 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 3350 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6650 XT 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.