AMD Radeon 8065S vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark runs between the AMD Radeon 8065S and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation. The head-to-head benchmark set is empty, and neither part has a win count against the other. The AMD Radeon 8065S has an average benchmark score of 0 and no individual benchmark entries, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has two recorded results: a Geekbench OpenCL score of 146,593 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 123,842. Its average benchmark score across those two tests is 135,218.

The NVIDIA part sits at the 95th percentile of all GPUs in the database. That percentile placement means it outperforms roughly 95% of recorded graphics hardware. Its nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA A10M with an average score of 135,230 (a delta of 0%), the AMD Radeon PRO W6800 at 135,396 (delta of -0.1%), the AMD Radeon Pro W6800X Duo at 135,774 (delta of -0.4%), and the AMD Radeon PRO V620 at 136,472 (delta of -0.9%). The RTX 4000 Ada Generation trails the AMD Radeon PRO V620 by 0.9%, sits essentially even with the A10M, and leads the PRO W6800 by 0.1%. These are all very close margins, indicating that the RTX 4000 Ada Generation occupies a tightly contested performance band.

For the AMD Radeon 8065S, the database shows a 50th percentile placement among all GPUs, with no benchmark scores recorded. The absence of recorded benchmark data means no quantitative comparison can be made directly between the two cards. The only numerical performance indicators available for the 8065S are its compute specifications, which are listed in the specification fields rather than in benchmark results. Consequently, any performance comparison must rely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured test scores.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different manufacturers and use different architectures. The AMD Radeon 8065S is built on RDNA 3.5 and uses a chip called Gorgon Halo. It belongs to the Navi Mobile (RX 8000M) generation and is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, is based on the AD104 chip, and belongs to the Workstation Ada generation. It is manufactured on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC.

The NVIDIA chip has a known transistor count of 35,800 million, while the AMD chip's transistor count is listed as unknown. Die sizes are similar: the AMD Radeon 8065S measures 308 mm², and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation measures 294 mm². The NVIDIA part has a recorded transistor density of 121.8M per mm², while the AMD part has no density figure listed.

The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system-shared memory, meaning its memory size, type, bus width, and bandwidth are all system dependent. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a dedicated 20 GB GDDR6 memory pool on a 160-bit bus, delivering 360.0 GB/s of bandwidth. Its memory clock is 2250 MHz with 18 Gbps effective data rate. This is a fundamental difference: one card relies on shared system memory, the other has its own dedicated VRAM.

Compute resources differ substantially. The AMD Radeon 8065S has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. It has 40 ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operation pipelines. It has 48 ray tracing cores and 192 tensor cores. The NVIDIA part has 3,584 more shading units, 32 more TMUs, 8 more RT cores, and 192 tensor cores that the AMD part does not list.

Clock speeds also differ. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a base clock of 1295 MHz and a boost clock of 3000 MHz. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a base clock of 1500 MHz and a boost clock of 2175 MHz. The AMD card has a higher boost clock by 825 MHz, while the NVIDIA card has a higher base clock by 205 MHz.

The power profiles are very different. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a TDP of 55 W, uses no power connectors, and is an integrated graphics product (IGP) with a slot width listed as IGP. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 130 W, uses a single 16-pin power connector, and is a single-slot card. The NVIDIA card has a suggested power supply of 300 W. The AMD card has no suggested PSU listed.

Interface and output differences exist as well. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses PCIe 5.0 x16, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The AMD card's display outputs are listed as portable device dependent, meaning they vary by the host system. The NVIDIA card has four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The AMD card has no recorded physical dimensions, while the NVIDIA card measures 245 mm in length (9.6 inches) and 112 mm in height (4.4 inches).

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so the API feature sets are identical.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has clear advantages in several measurable categories based on the recorded data. Its raw FP32 compute is 26.73 TFLOPS, compared to 15.36 TFLOPS for the AMD Radeon 8065S. That is a 74% higher FP32 throughput. Its FP16 performance is likewise 26.73 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, versus 15.36 TFLOPS at 1:1 for the AMD part. The NVIDIA card has 6,144 shading units versus 2,560, which is 2.4 times as many. It also has 192 tensor cores, while the AMD card lists none. This makes the NVIDIA card the stronger choice for any workload that uses tensor core acceleration.

The NVIDIA part also wins on memory allocation. Its 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth stands in contrast to the AMD card's system-shared memory, whose bandwidth is system dependent. For workloads that require consistent, high-bandwidth local memory, the NVIDIA card has a structural advantage.

The AMD Radeon 8065S wins on power efficiency and integration. Its 55 W TDP is less than half of the NVIDIA card's 130 W TDP. It needs no power connectors, while the NVIDIA card requires a 16-pin connector and a 300 W suggested power supply. The AMD card is an IGP, meaning it is integrated into the host system, whereas the NVIDIA card is a discrete single-slot add-in card. For systems where power draw and physical footprint are constrained, the AMD part is the more suitable option.

The AMD card also has a higher boost clock at 3000 MHz versus 2175 MHz for the NVIDIA part. Its pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s compared to 139.2 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 480.0 GTexel/s compared to 417.6 GTexel/s. These figures indicate that in fill-rate-bound operations, the AMD Radeon 8065S delivers more pixel output per second despite its lower overall compute throughput. The AMD card also uses PCIe 5.0 x16, which offers a newer bus interface than the NVIDIA card's PCIe 4.0 x16.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 6,144 shading units, while the AMD Radeon 8065S has 2,560.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 20 GB of GDDR6 memory. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system-shared memory, so its memory size is system dependent.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a TDP of 55 W and uses no power connectors. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has a TDP of 130 W and uses one 16-pin power connector with a suggested power supply of 300 W.

Q: Do both cards support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the process node for each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S is manufactured on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC.

Q: Which card has ray tracing cores?

A: Both have ray tracing cores. The AMD Radeon 8065S has 40, and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation has 48.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every recorded specification category. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses RDNA 3.5 architecture with a 4 nm process, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation uses Ada Lovelace on a 5 nm process. Both are made by TSMC. The transistor count is unknown for the AMD card, while the NVIDIA card has 35,800 million transistors. Die sizes are 308 mm² for AMD and 294 mm² for NVIDIA. Transistor density is only listed for NVIDIA at 121.8M per mm².

Clock speeds differ: AMD has a 1295 MHz base and 3000 MHz boost; NVIDIA has a 1500 MHz base and 2175 MHz boost. Memory configuration is the largest gap: AMD uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while NVIDIA has 20 GB GDDR6 on a 160-bit bus with 360.0 GB/s bandwidth and a 2250 MHz memory clock.

Compute resources differ across the board. AMD has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 40 RT cores. NVIDIA has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, 64 ROPs, 48 RT cores, and 192 tensor cores. Pixel rate is 192.0 GPixel/s for AMD and 139.2 GPixel/s for NVIDIA. Texture rate is 480.0 GTexel/s for AMD and 417.6 GTexel/s for NVIDIA. FP32 and FP16 are both 15.36 TFLOPS for AMD and 26.73 TFLOPS for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specifications differ greatly. AMD has a 55 W TDP, is an IGP with no power connectors, and has no listed dimensions. NVIDIA has a 130 W TDP, is a single-slot card with one 16-pin connector, a 300 W suggested power supply, and dimensions of 245 mm by 112 mm. The bus interface is PCIe 5.0 x16 for AMD and PCIe 4.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are portable device dependent for AMD and four DisplayPort 1.4a for NVIDIA.

Release dates differ. The AMD Radeon 8065S has a release date of 2025-12-31, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation was released on 2023-08-08. The AMD card's predecessor is listed as Polaris Mobile, and the NVIDIA card's predecessor is Workstation Ampere. The NVIDIA card has a successor listed as Blackwell PRO W, while the AMD card has none listed. Both are active production parts. Neither card has a launch MSRP recorded.

The Verdict

The data supports different conclusions depending on the use case. For compute-heavy workloads that rely on raw FP32 throughput, the NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation is the stronger part. Its 26.73 TFLOPS of FP32 and FP16 performance, combined with 6,144 shading units and 192 tensor cores, gives it a substantial raw compute advantage over the AMD Radeon 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS and 2,560 shading units. The NVIDIA card also offers 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory, which removes any dependency on system memory performance.

For integrated systems with strict power limits, the AMD Radeon 8065S is the more practical choice. Its 55 W TDP, lack of power connectors, and IGP form factor mean it can operate where a discrete 130 W card with a 16-pin connector cannot. Its higher boost clock of 3000 MHz, higher pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s, and higher texture rate of 480.0 GTexel/s also indicate that it can deliver strong fill-rate performance within its power envelope.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 Ada Generation's benchmark results place it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs, with an average benchmark score of 135,218. The AMD Radeon 8065S has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile, which is the median placement for all GPUs in the database. That percentile gap, combined with the NVIDIA card's dedicated memory and higher compute resources, points to the NVIDIA part as the better performer in measured workloads. The AMD part's advantages are in integration, power draw, and fill-rate metrics, not in recorded benchmark performance.