AMD Radeon 8065S vs AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison scenario. The AMD Radeon 8065S, a mobile integrated graphics processor, has no individual benchmark entries in the database, while the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE, a discrete desktop card, carries two distinct test results. The RX 7650 GRE scores 2336 points in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test and 83109 points in the Geekbench OpenCL test, giving it an average benchmark score of 42723. This places it in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, a strong overall showing.

The Radeon 8065S, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile, a position that reflects its lack of recorded measurements rather than an actual performance comparison. Without direct head-to-head test results between the two, the database cannot confirm a single win for either side. The wins counter shows 0 for both products, which means any performance claims must rely on architectural analysis and the few recorded figures available for the RX 7650 GRE.

What the data does reveal is the RX 7650 GRE's standing among its nearest rivals. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER by 1.2%, the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB by 1.2%, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile by 1.3%, and the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 by 1.3%. These narrow margins, all within 1.3 percentage points, indicate that the RX 7650 GRE performs at a level comparable to those established desktop and mobile cards. The 8065S has no such rival data, so its relative position cannot be quantified from the database.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs diverge sharply in their underlying designs. The Radeon 8065S uses the Gorgon Halo chip built on the RDNA 3.5 architecture, fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Its die size measures 308 mm², though its transistor count is unknown. The Radeon RX 7650 GRE uses the Navi 33 chip on the older RDNA 3.0 architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die is smaller at 204 mm², but its transistor count is listed at 13,300 million, and its transistor density is 65.2M per mm².

Clock speeds tell a different story. The 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz, while the RX 7650 GRE runs a higher base of 1720 MHz but a lower boost of 2695 MHz, with a game clock of 2350 MHz. Memory configurations are entirely dissimilar. The 8065S uses system shared memory, meaning its size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all dependent on the host device. The RX 7650 GRE has dedicated 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

Compute resources also differ. The 8065S packs 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 render output units, and 40 ray tracing cores. The RX 7650 GRE has fewer of each: 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. Despite having more compute units, the 8065S produces lower raw throughput figures. Its pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 480.0 GTexel/s, versus 172.5 GPixel/s and 345.0 GTexel/s for the RX 7650 GRE. The FP32 and FP16 performance for the 8065S is 15.36 TFLOPS, while the RX 7650 GRE reaches 22.08 TFLOPS in both, a substantial 6.72 TFLOPS advantage.

Power and interface designs reflect their intended roles. The 8065S is an integrated graphics processor with a 55 W TDP, no power connectors, and a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface. The RX 7650 GRE is a dual-slot discrete card with a 170 W TDP, a single 8-pin power connector, a suggested power supply of 450 W, and a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. Display outputs also differ: the 8065S depends on the portable device, while the RX 7650 GRE offers one HDMI 2.1a port and three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 8065S wins in efficiency and integration. Its 55 W TDP is dramatically lower than the RX 7650 GRE's 170 W, which means it generates far less heat and requires no external power connectors. As an integrated processor with a PCIe 5.0 x16 connection, it fits into compact portable devices where space is at a premium. Its higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, compared to 2695 MHz for the RX 7650 GRE, suggests strong peak performance when needed, and its larger die size of 308 mm² indicates a more complex design with more shading units and ray tracing cores.

The Radeon RX 7650 GRE wins in raw compute and memory. Its 22.08 TFLOPS FP32 performance is 43.75% higher than the 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS, a decisive margin for compute-heavy tasks. Its 8 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth is a clear advantage over system shared memory, which suffers from the performance and latency constraints of sharing bandwidth with the CPU. The RX 7650 GRE also has a higher base clock of 1720 MHz, which means it delivers more consistent performance without relying on boost behavior.

The benchmark percentile data reinforces this split. The RX 7650 GRE sits at the 83rd percentile of all GPUs, while the 8065S sits at the 50th percentile, but that gap is due to the 8065S having no recorded benchmarks, not a measured deficit. The RX 7650 GRE's average benchmark score of 42723, combined with its near-tie against the RTX 4070 SUPER and other rivals, places it in a performance class that the 8065S cannot claim without test results.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation of use cases. The Radeon RX 7650 GRE is the choice for anyone who needs sustained, high-throughput rendering or compute work on a desktop system. Its 22.08 TFLOPS FP32 performance, 288.0 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth, and 83rd percentile standing among all GPUs make it a capable discrete card for demanding applications. The narrow margins against the RTX 4070 SUPER, within 1.3%, confirm that it competes at a high level.

The Radeon 8065S is the choice for a mobile, power-constrained environment where integration matters more than absolute performance. Its 55 W TDP is roughly one-third of the RX 7650 GRE's 170 W, its integrated design requires no additional cards or connectors, and its 40 ray tracing cores and 2560 shading units provide a solid feature set for an integrated solution. The 3000 MHz boost clock is the highest in this comparison, which could translate to responsive short-duration performance.

For a desktop builder prioritizing raw capability, the RX 7650 GRE is the only option with recorded evidence of performance. For a laptop or handheld device where power draw and physical footprint are the primary constraints, the 8065S offers a compelling integrated package. The absence of benchmark data for the 8065S means no direct performance verdict is possible, but its architectural advantages in efficiency and core count are clear from the specifications.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE has a higher FP32 performance at 22.08 TFLOPS, compared to 15.36 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 8065S.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two cards?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a 55 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE has a 170 W TDP, a difference of 115 W.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 8065S have dedicated memory?

A: No, the AMD Radeon 8065S uses system shared memory, so its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. The RX 7650 GRE, by contrast, has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: How does the RX 7650 GRE compare to the RTX 4070 SUPER?

A: The RX 7650 GRE trails the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER by 1.2% in average benchmark score, with an average score of 42723 versus 43223.

Q: What is the process node for each chip?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S uses a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE uses a 6 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has 40 ray tracing cores, while the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE has 32 ray tracing cores.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon 8065S | AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 6 nm |

| Die Size | 308 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistors | Unknown | 13,300 million |

| Base Clock | 1295 MHz | 1720 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3000 MHz | 2695 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 8 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 288.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 2048 |

| TMUs | 160 | 128 |

| ROPs | 64 | 64 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 40 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 192.0 GPixel/s | 172.5 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 480.0 GTexel/s | 345.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 15.36 TFLOPS | 22.08 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 15.36 TFLOPS | 22.08 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 55 W | 170 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 5.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |

| Release Date | 2025-12-31 | 2025-02-06 |