AMD Radeon 8065S vs AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no direct benchmark scores for either the AMD Radeon 8065S or the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU. Both entries report an average benchmark score of 0 and an identical percentile ranking of 50 against all GPUs in the database. This means the database does not yet have any measured performance results for these two parts, so a numerical head-to-head comparison cannot be established from the measurements on file.

What the database does provide is a clear theoretical performance hierarchy based on the specification records. The Radeon 8065S carries a peak FP32 throughput of 15.36 TFLOPS, while the Ryzen Z1 GPU manages 2.560 TFLOPS. That puts the 8065S at exactly 6 times the single-precision compute throughput of the Z1 GPU. The gap is similarly visible in pixel throughput: the 8065S reaches 192.0 GPixel/s versus 20.00 GPixel/s for the Z1, a 9.6x difference. Texture rate follows the same pattern, with the 8065S at 480.0 GTexel/s and the Z1 at 40.00 GTexel/s, again a 12x spread.

Because the head-to-head benchmark table is empty and no nearest rival data is listed for either part, the only defensible conclusions come from the specification sheets. The 8065S is the far larger and more capable graphics processor on paper, while the Z1 GPU is a much smaller, lower-power design. The absence of measured results means the database cannot confirm how these theoretical deltas translate into real-world application performance, but the compute and fill-rate figures point to a decisive advantage for the Radeon 8065S in every throughput category recorded.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different generations of AMD graphics architecture. The Radeon 8065S is built on RDNA 3.5 and belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation, using the Gorgon Halo chip. The Ryzen Z1 GPU uses RDNA 3.0 and is classified as a Console GPU (AMD), built on the Phoenix chip. Both parts are fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC, so the manufacturing node is identical. The die sizes differ substantially: the 8065S measures 308 mm², while the Phoenix die is 178 mm². Transistor counts are listed as unknown for the 8065S, but the Z1 GPU reports 25,390 million transistors with a density of 142.6M per mm².

The execution resources reveal the scale of the difference. The Radeon 8065S has 2560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, 64 raster output pipelines, and 40 ray tracing cores. The Ryzen Z1 GPU has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. That is exactly 10x the shading units and TMUs, 8x the ROPs, and 10x the ray tracing cores in favor of the 8065S.

Clock behavior also differs. The 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The Z1 GPU has a higher base clock at 1500 MHz but a lower boost ceiling at 2500 MHz. Memory configuration is fundamentally different: the 8065S uses system shared memory with a system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated VRAM, while the Z1 GPU has 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 51.20 GB/s of bandwidth and a memory clock of 800 MHz (6.4 Gbps effective). The 8065S reports no dedicated memory size, type, or bus width, instead relying entirely on shared system memory.

The power envelopes are also far apart. The 8065S is rated at 55 W TDP and is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with no power connectors. The Z1 GPU is rated at 30 W TDP and also has no power connectors, but it is a physically large add-in-style card with dimensions of 280 mm by 111 mm by 21 mm (11 inches by 4.4 inches by 0.8 inches). The 8065S has no listed physical dimensions and uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 bus interface, while the Z1 GPU has no bus interface listed. Display outputs differ as well: the 8065S is marked as portable device dependent, while the Z1 GPU has no outputs at all.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The FP16 capabilities diverge: the 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, whereas the Z1 GPU achieves 5.120 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio, meaning its FP16 rate is double its FP32 rate.

Where Each One Wins

The Radeon 8065S wins in raw compute, fill rate, texture throughput, and ray tracing resource count. Its 15.36 TFLOPS FP32 figure is the headline number, and the 192.0 GPixel/s pixel rate and 480.0 GTexel/s texture rate are proportionally massive advantages. The 40 ray tracing cores versus 4 give it a clear edge in any ray-traced workload that scales with core count. The 3000 MHz boost clock is also 500 MHz higher than the Z1 GPU's 2500 MHz boost, which helps in lightly threaded or boost-sensitive scenarios. The 8065S also supports PCIe 5.0 x16, which is a newer and wider bus interface than anything listed for the Z1 GPU.

The Ryzen Z1 GPU wins in memory determinism and power efficiency. It has a fixed 16 GB LPDDR5 pool with a known 51.20 GB/s bandwidth and a 64-bit bus, whereas the 8065S depends entirely on system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth. For workloads that need predictable memory performance, the Z1 GPU's dedicated allocation is a structural advantage. The Z1 GPU also draws less power at 30 W versus 55 W, and its higher base clock of 1500 MHz means it starts from a higher frequency point. The 2:1 FP16 ratio on the Z1 GPU means it can reach 5.120 TFLOPS in half-precision, which is more than double its FP32 output, a rare capability for such a small chip. The 8065S does not gain any extra FP16 headroom, staying at 1:1.

The 8065S is also the newer part, with a release date of 2025-12-31 (recorded as 2025-12-31T17:00:00.000Z), while the Z1 GPU was released on 2023-09-17 (recorded as 2023-09-17T17:00:00.000Z). The 8065S has a listed predecessor, Polaris Mobile, while the Z1 GPU has no predecessor recorded. The 8065S is in the Navi Mobile RX 8000M generation, which suggests a laptop-oriented product, while the Z1 GPU is classified under Console GPU (AMD).

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the AMD Radeon 8065S than the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU in FP32 compute?

A: The 8065S delivers 15.36 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the Z1 GPU delivers 2.560 TFLOPS. This makes the 8065S exactly 6 times faster in single-precision compute.

Q: Do both GPUs use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes. Both the Radeon 8065S and the Ryzen Z1 GPU are fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC.

Q: What memory does each GPU use?

A: The 8065S uses system shared memory with system dependent bandwidth and no dedicated VRAM size, type, or bus width listed. The Z1 GPU uses 16 GB of LPDDR5 on a 64-bit bus with 51.20 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more ray tracing cores?

A: The Radeon 8065S has 40 ray tracing cores, while the Ryzen Z1 GPU has 4 ray tracing cores, a 10x advantage for the 8065S.

Q: What is the TDP of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 8065S is rated at 55 W, and the Ryzen Z1 GPU is rated at 30 W.

Q: Which GPU supports a faster PCIe interface?

A: The Radeon 8065S uses PCIe 5.0 x16. The Ryzen Z1 GPU has no bus interface listed in the database.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon 8065S is the dominant graphics processor by a wide margin across every compute and fill-rate metric recorded. Its FP32 throughput is 6x higher, its pixel rate is 9.6x higher, its texture rate is 12x higher, and it carries 10x the ray tracing cores of the Ryzen Z1 GPU. The 8065S also benefits from a newer architecture generation (RDNA 3.5 versus RDNA 3.0), a larger die (308 mm² versus 178 mm²), a higher boost clock (3000 MHz versus 2500 MHz), and a more recent release date. It is the part to choose when raw graphics performance is the priority.

The Ryzen Z1 GPU is not without its own case. It offers a fixed 16 GB LPDDR5 memory pool with a known 51.20 GB/s bandwidth, which is more predictable than the 8065S's system dependent shared memory. It operates at a lower 30 W TDP, making it the more power-conscious option. Its higher base clock of 1500 MHz and its 2:1 FP16 ratio, which yields 5.120 TFLOPS in half-precision, are notable structural advantages. For workloads that require deterministic memory behavior or minimal power draw, the Z1 GPU has a legitimate role.

The database has no measured benchmarks for either GPU, so the verdict rests entirely on specification analysis. Based on that analysis, the Radeon 8065S is the superior performer in nearly every measurable category, while the Ryzen Z1 GPU offers a more efficient, memory-stable alternative. The choice depends on whether the workload prioritizes maximum throughput or predictable low-power operation. Pick the 8065S for compute-heavy and ray-traced tasks. Pick the Z1 GPU for power-limited or memory-sensitive environments.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the AMD Radeon 8065S and the AMD Ryzen Z1 GPU:

• Architecture: RDNA 3.5 (8065S) versus RDNA 3.0 (Z1)
• Chip: Gorgon Halo (8065S) versus Phoenix (Z1)
• Generation: Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) (8065S) versus Console GPU (AMD) (Z1)
• Die Size: 308 mm² (8065S) versus 178 mm² (Z1)
• Transistors: unknown (8065S) versus 25,390 million (Z1)
• Transistor Density: not listed (8065S) versus 142.6M / mm² (Z1)
• Base Clock: 1295 MHz (8065S) versus 1500 MHz (Z1)
• Boost Clock: 3000 MHz (8065S) versus 2500 MHz (Z1)
• Memory Clock: System Shared (8065S) versus 800 MHz, 6.4 Gbps effective (Z1)
• Memory Size: System Shared (8065S) versus 16 GB (Z1)
• Memory Type: System Shared (8065S) versus LPDDR5 (Z1)
• Memory Bus Width: System Shared (8065S) versus 64 bit (Z1)
• Memory Bandwidth: System Dependent (8065S) versus 51.20 GB/s (Z1)
• Shading Units: 2560 (8065S) versus 256 (Z1)
• Texture Mapping Units: 160 (8065S) versus 16 (Z1)
• Raster Output Pipelines: 64 (8065S) versus 8 (Z1)
• Ray Tracing Cores: 40 (8065S) versus 4 (Z1)
• Pixel Rate: 192.0 GPixel/s (8065S) versus 20.00 GPixel/s (Z1)
• Texture Rate: 480.0 GTexel/s (8065S) versus 40.00 GTexel/s (Z1)
• FP32 Performance: 15.36 TFLOPS (8065S) versus 2.560 TFLOPS (Z1)
• FP16 Performance: 15.36 TFLOPS (1:1) (8065S) versus 5.120 TFLOPS (2:1) (Z1)
• TDP: 55 W (8065S) versus 30 W (Z1)
• Slot Width: IGP (8065S) versus not listed (Z1)
• Bus Interface: PCIe 5.0 x16 (8065S) versus not listed (Z1)
• Display Outputs: Portable Device Dependent (8065S) versus No outputs (Z1)
• Dimensions: not listed (8065S) versus 280 mm x 111 mm x 21 mm (Z1)
• Release Date: 2025-12-31 (8065S) versus 2023-09-17 (Z1)
• Predecessor: Polaris Mobile (8065S) versus not listed (Z1)
• Launch MSRP: not listed (8065S) versus 599 USD (Z1)

Fields that are identical include the manufacturer (AMD), process node (4 nm), foundry (TSMC), DirectX support (12 Ultimate, 12_2), OpenGL support (4.6), Vulkan support (1.4), power connectors (None), production status (Active), and the absence of tensor cores and game clock data in both records.