AMD Radeon 8050S vs AMD Radeon RX 6650M Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M and AMD Radeon 8050S represent two distinct generations of AMD mobile graphics, and the benchmark data reveals a fascinating split. While the newer Radeon 8050S edges out a marginal victory in OpenCL compute, the older RX 6650M delivers a decisive win in Vulkan performance, making the choice between them entirely dependent on workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench results show a clear divergence in strengths. In the geekbench_opencl test, the AMD Radeon 8050S scores 65,818, narrowly outpacing the RX 6650M’s 65,800. This delta of 0% is effectively a statistical tie, indicating that raw compute throughput under OpenCL is nearly identical between the two. Both GPUs land within a hair of each other, with the 8050S holding a negligible lead of just 18 points. This suggests that for OpenCL-based workloads—often found in scientific computing and certain rendering tasks—users should expect essentially interchangeable performance.

The story changes dramatically in the geekbench_vulkan benchmark. Here, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M posts a commanding score of 77,735, while the Radeon 8050S trails significantly at 58,398. The RX 6650M wins by a margin of 33.1%, a substantial gap that highlights the older card’s superior Vulkan optimization. This result is particularly striking because Vulkan is a low-level API heavily used in modern gaming and real-time graphics. The RX 6650M’s 33.1% advantage means that in Vulkan-based game titles, the 6650M will deliver meaningfully higher frame rates and smoother performance.

Looking at the broader competitive context, the RX 6650M’s average benchmark score of 71,768 places it at the 91st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (average score 72,098, delta -0.5%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (72,379, -0.8%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829, +1.3%). The RX 6650M sits comfortably in this high-end company, trading blows with desktop-class cards from previous generations. In contrast, the Radeon 8050S achieves an average benchmark score of 62,108, placing it at the 89th percentile. Its closest competitors are the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896, delta +0.3%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 56 (63,693, -2.5%), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775, -2.6%). While the 8050S is only slightly below these rivals, the gap to the RX 6650M’s performance tier is clear—roughly 15% separates their average scores.

The head-to-head record is evenly split at one win apiece, but the magnitude of those wins matters. The RX 6650M’s Vulkan victory is decisive and impactful for gaming workloads, whereas the 8050S’s OpenCL win is negligible in practical terms. When weighing which GPU offers better real-world performance, the Vulkan result carries more weight for most users, particularly those interested in gaming or VR applications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M has a significantly higher average benchmark score of 71,768, compared to the AMD Radeon 8050S’s 62,108. This places the RX 6650M at the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the 8050S sits at the 89th percentile.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 6650M is substantially faster in Vulkan, scoring 77,735 versus the 8050S’s 58,398. This represents a 33.1% advantage for the RX 6650M, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based gaming and graphics workloads.

Q: Is the OpenCL performance difference meaningful?

A: No. In the geekbench_opencl test, the 8050S scores 65,818 while the RX 6650M scores 65,800, a difference of only 0%. This is effectively a tie, so users should expect identical OpenCL compute performance from both GPUs.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU based on average score?

A: The RX 6650M’s nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (average score 72,379, delta -0.8%), followed by the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (72,098, -0.5%). The 8050S’s closest rival is the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M (61,896, delta +0.3%), with the AMD Radeon RX 7600M (63,775, -2.6%) also nearby.

Q: Which GPU has better raw compute specifications?

A: The Radeon 8050S has higher raw compute specifications, with 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and an FP32 throughput of 11.47 TFLOPS. The RX 6650M offers 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 8.659 TFLOPS FP32 performance.

Q: What do the win counts indicate?

A: The head-to-head record is tied at one win each. However, the RX 6650M’s Vulkan win (33.1% delta) is far more substantial than the 8050S’s OpenCL win (0% delta), suggesting the 6650M provides a more meaningful performance advantage in graphics-intensive applications.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture that defies simple generational assumptions. For users prioritizing Vulkan-based gaming or real-time graphics, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the unequivocal choice. Its 33.1% lead in Vulkan performance translates directly to higher frame rates in modern titles that utilize this API. The RX 6650M also holds a higher average benchmark score (71,768 vs. 62,108) and a better percentile ranking (91st vs. 89th), indicating superior overall performance across a broader range of workloads.

However, the AMD Radeon 8050S should not be dismissed. Its OpenCL performance is statistically identical to the RX 6650M, making it a viable option for compute-focused tasks that rely on OpenCL. The 8050S also offers significantly better specifications on paper, including more shading units (2,048 vs. 1,792), higher texture rate (358.4 GTexel/s vs. 270.6 GTexel/s), and superior FP32 throughput (11.47 TFLOPS vs. 8.659 TFLOPS). These specifications suggest that the 8050S has untapped potential that may be realized as driver optimizations mature.

The power efficiency story also favors the 8050S, with a TDP of just 55 W compared to the RX 6650M’s 120 W. For thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermals are critical, the 8050S’s lower power draw is a compelling advantage, even if its current benchmark scores lag behind. The RX 6650M, by contrast, is an end-of-life product (production status: End-of-life) released in 2022, while the 8050S is active and newer, released in 2025. Users building a new system may prefer the active, forward-looking platform.

Ultimately, the choice hinges on workload priorities. Gamers and users of Vulkan-based applications should select the RX 6650M for its proven, substantial performance advantage. Compute-focused users who prioritize OpenCL and value efficiency should consider the 8050S, accepting its current Vulkan deficit in exchange for a more modern architecture and dramatically lower power consumption.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every core specification. The RX 6650M features 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the 8050S increases shading units to 2,048 and TMUs to 128, maintaining 64 ROPs. Ray tracing cores also differ, with the 8050S offering 32 RT cores versus 28 on the RX 6650M. Clock speeds show a significant divergence: the RX 6650M has a base clock of 2068 MHz and boost clock of 2416 MHz, while the 8050S operates at a lower base of 1295 MHz but boosts higher to 2800 MHz.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The RX 6650M uses 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 8050S, in contrast, relies on System Shared memory with a System Dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance varies based on the host system’s configuration. This architectural choice makes the 8050S’s memory bandwidth a variable rather than a fixed specification.

Compute throughput differs substantially. The RX 6650M delivers 8.659 TFLOPS FP32 and 17.32 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), while the 8050S offers 11.47 TFLOPS FP32 and 11.47 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio). Pixel and texture rates also favor the 8050S: 179.2 GPixel/s and 358.4 GTexel/s versus 154.6 GPixel/s and 270.6 GTexel/s on the RX 6650M. Power consumption is starkly different—the RX 6650M has a 120 W TDP, while the 8050S draws just 55 W. Both use PCIe interfaces, but the RX 6650M uses PCIe 4.0 x8 while the 8050S uses the newer PCIe 5.0 x16. The RX 6650M has 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, while the 8050S’s transistor count is unknown on a larger 308 mm² die.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these GPUs spans two full RDNA generations. The RX 6650M is built on RDNA 2.0 architecture with the Navi 23 chip, manufactured on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The 8050S advances to RDNA 3.5 architecture with the Strix Halo chip, produced on TSMC’s 4 nm process. This process shrink from 7 nm to 4 nm enables the 8050S to achieve higher transistor density and improved power efficiency, explaining its 55 W TDP despite higher raw compute specifications.

The RX 6650M belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation, while the 8050S is part of the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation. Both share the same predecessor (Polaris Mobile) and support identical API levels: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. However, their FP16 implementations differ fundamentally—the RX 6650M uses a 2:1 ratio (17.32 TFLOPS FP16 vs. 8.659 TFLOPS FP32), while the 8050S uses a 1:1 ratio (11.47 TFLOPS for both), indicating a different approach to half-precision compute.

The 8050S’s System Shared memory architecture is a major departure from the RX 6650M’s dedicated 8 GB GDDR6 configuration. This unified memory approach allows the 8050S to access system RAM flexibly, but it introduces performance variability dependent on the host platform’s memory speed and capacity. The RX 6650M’s fixed 224.0 GB/s bandwidth provides predictable performance, whereas the 8050S’s bandwidth is listed as System Dependent. Both GPUs are IGP slot width with no power connectors, making them suitable for portable devices, and both feature Portable Device Dependent display outputs. The RX 6650M is end-of-life with a 2022 release, while the 8050S remains active with a 2025 release, reflecting their positions in AMD’s product lifecycle.