AMD Radeon 8065S vs AMD Radeon RX 7600 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon 8065S and the AMD Radeon RX 7600. The Radeon 8065S has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, while the Radeon RX 7600 has an average benchmark score of 15,171 and sits at the 57th percentile. This percentile gap indicates that the RX 7600 outperforms a majority of recorded GPUs, while the 8065S currently has no recorded performance data to establish its standing.

Looking at the RX 7600’s individual benchmark results, it delivers a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,310, a Geekbench OpenCL score of 88,051, and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 34,401. In PassMark tests, it scores 84 in DirectX 10, 172 in DirectX 11, 58 in DirectX 12, 226 in DirectX 9, 984 in G2D, 16,634 in G3D, and 8,790 in GPU Compute. These figures represent the only concrete performance measurements available for either card in the database.

The RX 7600’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 OEM with an average score of 15,199, which is 0.2% higher than the RX 7600. The AMD Radeon Pro 560X averages 15,082, which is 0.6% lower. The AMD Radeon 680M averages 15,270, which is 0.7% higher, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660 Ti averages 15,063, which is 0.7% lower. These deltas are all within one percentage point, indicating that the RX 7600 sits in a tightly clustered performance band. The Radeon 8065S has no nearest rivals listed, so no comparative deltas can be established for it.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon RX 7600 wins on every measurable axis because it is the only card with recorded benchmark scores. Its PassMark G3D score of 16,634 and average benchmark score of 15,171 place it clearly ahead of the Radeon 8065S’s average score of 0. The RX 7600 also wins on raw compute throughput: it delivers 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS. Similarly, the RX 7600 reaches 21.75 TFLOPS of FP16 performance, versus 15.36 TFLOPS for the 8065S, both at a 1:1 ratio.

In terms of memory bandwidth, the RX 7600 has a fixed 288.0 GB/s across a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The 8065S uses system shared memory, with bandwidth described as system dependent, so no fixed comparison is possible. The RX 7600’s texture rate is 339.8 GTexel/s, while the 8065S achieves 480.0 GTexel/s, giving the 8065S a win in texture throughput. The 8065S also wins in pixel rate at 192.0 GPixel/s versus 169.9 GPixel/s for the RX 7600.

The RX 7600 wins on shading units with 2,048 versus 2,560 for the 8065S, but the 8065S has more TMUs (160 versus 128) and more RT cores (40 versus 32). Both cards have 64 ROPs. Clock speeds favor the RX 7600 at base (1,720 MHz versus 1,295 MHz) but the 8065S has a higher boost clock (3,000 MHz versus 2,655 MHz). The RX 7600 also has a defined game clock of 2,250 MHz, while the 8065S has none recorded.

For use-case analysis, the RX 7600 is the clear choice for any workload requiring fixed memory bandwidth or a dedicated frame buffer. The 8065S, with its system shared memory and system dependent bandwidth, is suited to portable devices where the memory configuration is dictated by the host platform. The 8065S’s higher texture rate and pixel rate suggest it could excel in fill-rate-bound scenarios, but without benchmark data, this remains speculative.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations. The Radeon 8065S uses RDNA 3.5 on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the chip named Gorgon Halo from the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation. The Radeon RX 7600 uses RDNA 3.0 on a 6 nm TSMC process, with the chip named Navi 33 from the Navi III (RX 7000) generation. The RX 7600 has a codename of Hotpink Bonefish, while the 8065S has no codename listed.

The die sizes differ substantially: the 8065S measures 308 mm², while the RX 7600 measures 204 mm². The RX 7600 has a recorded transistor count of 13,300 million and a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The 8065S has an unknown transistor count and no density figure. The RX 7600 is built on a larger process node but has a smaller die, which is consistent with its lower transistor density.

Memory architecture is fundamentally different. The 8065S uses system shared memory of an unspecified size and type, with a system shared bus width and system dependent bandwidth. The RX 7600 has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 8065S’s memory clock is listed as system shared, while the RX 7600 runs at 2,250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective.

Power and physical configuration differ sharply. The 8065S has a TDP of 55 W, uses an integrated graphics processor (IGP) slot width, and requires no power connectors. The RX 7600 has a TDP of 165 W, uses a dual-slot design, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W. The RX 7600 measures 204 mm in length and 115 mm in height, while the 8065S has no dimensions recorded. The 8065S uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the RX 7600 uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 8065S has display outputs described as portable device dependent, while the RX 7600 offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. The 8065S was released on 2025-12-31, while the RX 7600 was released on 2023-05-24. The RX 7600’s predecessor is Navi II and its successor is Navi IV, while the 8065S’s predecessor is Polaris Mobile and it has no successor listed. The RX 7600 has a launch MSRP of 269 USD, while the 8065S has no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7600 delivers 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to 15.36 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 8065S.

Q: How do the memory systems compare?

A: The RX 7600 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 8065S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth, meaning its memory performance depends on the host device.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 7600 has a TDP of 165 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and has a suggested PSU of 450 W. The 8065S has a TDP of 55 W and requires no power connectors.

Q: Which card has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 40 RT cores, while the AMD Radeon RX 7600 has 32 RT cores.

Q: What is the release timeline for these GPUs?

A: The RX 7600 was released on 2023-05-24, while the 8065S was released on 2025-12-31.

Q: How does the RX 7600 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The RX 7600 is within 0.7% of all its nearest rivals. It is 0.2% slower than the RTX 3050 OEM, 0.6% faster than the Radeon Pro 560X, 0.7% slower than the Radeon 680M, and 0.7% faster than the GTX 660 Ti.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a one-sided comparison. The AMD Radeon RX 7600 has a full set of benchmark scores, an average score of 15,171, and a 57th percentile ranking among all GPUs. The AMD Radeon 8065S has an average score of 0, a 50th percentile ranking, and no benchmark results in the database. Anyone seeking a GPU with verified performance should select the RX 7600, as it is the only option with measurable results.

The RX 7600 also wins on compute: 21.75 TFLOPS of FP32 versus 15.36 TFLOPS for the 8065S, and 21.75 TFLOPS of FP16 versus 15.36 TFLOPS. It has a fixed 288.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth, while the 8065S’s bandwidth is system dependent. The RX 7600 has a higher base clock (1,720 MHz versus 1,295 MHz) and a defined game clock of 2,250 MHz, though the 8065S has a higher boost clock (3,000 MHz versus 2,655 MHz).

The 8065S does show advantages in specific hardware counts: 2,560 shading units versus 2,048, 160 TMUs versus 128, 40 RT cores versus 32, a higher texture rate (480.0 GTexel/s versus 339.8 GTexel/s), and a higher pixel rate (192.0 GPixel/s versus 169.9 GPixel/s). It also uses a newer process node (4 nm versus 6 nm), a larger die (308 mm² versus 204 mm²), and a more recent PCIe interface (5.0 x16 versus 4.0 x8). Its 55 W TDP is markedly lower than the RX 7600’s 165 W, and it requires no power connectors.

However, none of those architectural advantages translate into recorded benchmark wins. The database contains no 8065S scores, no head-to-head results, and no rival comparisons for it. The RX 7600, by contrast, has ten separate benchmark entries and sits within 0.7% of four nearest rivals, confirming it operates in a consistent, well-characterized performance band. For any user who requires verified performance data, the RX 7600 is the only defensible choice from the recorded information.