AMD Radeon 8065S vs NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows that the AMD Radeon 8065S and the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation represent two distinct approaches to compact graphics hardware, yet only one of them has active benchmark scores in the database. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has two measured scores: 124,812 in Geekbench OpenCL and 109,364 in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score across these tests is 117,088. The AMD Radeon 8065S, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, resulting in an average score of 0. This means the head-to-head comparison is one-sided in terms of measurable performance data.

The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation sits at the 95th percentile among all GPUs in the database, a position that places it well above the AMD Radeon 8065S, which sits at the 50th percentile. The percentile data alone indicates a substantial gap in overall performance ranking. When examining nearest rivals for the NVIDIA card, the data shows it is nearly tied with the NVIDIA GB10, which has an average score of 117,393 and a delta of -0.3%, meaning the RTX 4000 SFF is essentially at parity with that part. It trails the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 by 1.6% (that card scores 118,976), and it leads the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB by 2.4% (114,395) and the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile by 2.8% (113,944). This cluster of rivals all sit within a narrow band, confirming that the RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is a mid-to-high-tier performer in the database's ranking structure.

For the AMD Radeon 8065S, the absence of benchmark scores means there are no deltas to report against any rivals. The head-to-head benchmark array in the database is empty, and the wins counter shows zero for both parts. The only direct numerical comparison available comes from the theoretical specifications, which show the NVIDIA card delivering 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 15.36 TFLOPS for the AMD card. That 3.81 TFLOPS difference represents a 24.8% advantage for the NVIDIA part in raw single-precision compute throughput. In texture rate, the AMD card posts 480.0 GTexel/s against 299.5 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, giving AMD a 60.3% advantage. Pixel rate favors AMD as well, with 192.0 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s, a 92.3% lead.

These theoretical rates tell a clear story: the AMD Radeon 8065S is built for fill-rate-bound workloads, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is oriented toward shader and ray-tracing throughput. The shading unit count reinforces this, with NVIDIA offering 6,144 shading units versus 2,560 for AMD. The NVIDIA card also carries 192 tensor cores and 48 RT cores, while the AMD part lists 40 RT cores and no tensor core entry. In ray-tracing hardware, the NVIDIA card has 20% more RT cores, and in AI-acceleration hardware, it has a dedicated tensor core array where AMD lists none.

The Verdict

The data in the database points to a clear distinction between these two parts. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the only one of the two with actual performance measurements, and its average benchmark score of 117,088 places it at the 95th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon 8065S has zero recorded scores and sits at the 50th percentile, which in the database's ranking system represents a median position. Any user selecting between these two based on recorded data would have to choose the NVIDIA card, as it is the only one with verified benchmark results.

The specification data reinforces this verdict for compute-heavy workloads. The NVIDIA card delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 24.8% higher than the AMD card's 15.36 TFLOPS. It also has 192 tensor cores for AI workloads, a feature the AMD part does not list. The NVIDIA card's 20 GB of GDDR6 memory with 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth provides dedicated, non-shared memory, whereas the AMD card relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth described as system-dependent. For workstation tasks that require consistent memory performance, the NVIDIA card's dedicated frame buffer is a structural advantage.

However, the AMD Radeon 8065S has its own strengths in the recorded specifications. Its fill rates are measurably higher: 480.0 GTexel/s versus 299.5 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, and 192.0 GPixel/s versus 99.84 GPixel/s. It also boosts to 3000 MHz, nearly double the NVIDIA card's 1560 MHz boost clock, and it runs on a 4 nm process node versus 5 nm for the NVIDIA card. Its thermal design power of 55 W is 15 W lower than the NVIDIA card's 70 W, and it uses no power connectors, requiring no external power. The AMD part is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a slot width of IGP, meaning it occupies no expansion slot, while the NVIDIA card is a dual-slot add-in board measuring 168 mm in length and 69 mm in height.

The verdict from the database is straightforward: the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is the part with proven benchmark performance and a 95th-percentile ranking. The AMD Radeon 8065S is a lower-power integrated solution with superior fill rates but no recorded performance data. The choice depends on whether the user needs verified compute performance and dedicated memory (NVIDIA) or lower power draw and higher pixel/texture throughput (AMD).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs use fundamentally different architectures from their respective manufacturers. The AMD Radeon 8065S is built on RDNA 3.5, which is the architecture used in the Navi Mobile generation, specifically the RX 8000M series. Its chip is codenamed Gorgon Halo, and it is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The die size is 308 mm², and the transistor count is listed as unknown in the database. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation uses the Ada Lovelace architecture, built on the AD104 chip, and is fabricated on a 5 nm process at TSMC. Its die size is 294 mm², slightly smaller than the AMD die, but it packs 35,800 million transistors, giving it a transistor density of 121.8 million per square millimeter.

The memory architecture differs significantly. The AMD card uses system-shared memory, meaning it has no dedicated VRAM and instead shares system RAM. Its memory type, bus width, and size are all listed as "System Shared," and its bandwidth is described as "System Dependent." The NVIDIA card has 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus, delivering 280.0 GB/s of bandwidth. This is a fundamental architectural difference: one part relies on the host system's memory, while the other has its own frame buffer.

The compute resources are organized differently as well. The AMD card has 2,560 shading units, 160 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. It lists 40 RT cores and no tensor cores. The NVIDIA card has 6,144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. It lists 48 RT cores and 192 tensor cores. The NVIDIA card has 2.4 times the shading units, 1.2 times the TMUs, and 1.2 times the RT cores compared to AMD. The AMD card has a 2.5 times higher boost clock (3000 MHz versus 1560 MHz), which partially compensates for the lower unit counts in certain workloads.

Both cards support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API-level feature support is identical. The AMD card uses a PCIe 5.0 x16 interface, while the NVIDIA card uses PCIe 4.0 x16. The AMD card's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning it is designed for laptops or portable devices where the display connection is determined by the host system. The NVIDIA card has four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs on the card itself.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two parts according to the recorded data:

• Process node: AMD uses 4 nm; NVIDIA uses 5 nm.
• Die size: AMD is 308 mm²; NVIDIA is 294 mm².
• Transistors: AMD is unknown; NVIDIA is 35,800 million.
• Transistor density: AMD has no entry; NVIDIA is 121.8M / mm².
• Base clock: AMD is 1295 MHz; NVIDIA is 720 MHz.
• Boost clock: AMD is 3000 MHz; NVIDIA is 1560 MHz.
• Memory clock: AMD is "System Shared"; NVIDIA is 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective).
• Memory size: AMD is "System Shared"; NVIDIA is 20 GB.
• Memory type: AMD is "System Shared"; NVIDIA is GDDR6.
• Memory bus width: AMD is "System Shared"; NVIDIA is 160 bit.
• Memory bandwidth: AMD is "System Dependent"; NVIDIA is 280.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: AMD is 2,560; NVIDIA is 6,144.
• TMUs: AMD is 160; NVIDIA is 192.
• ROPs: Both are 64 (no difference).
• RT cores: AMD is 40; NVIDIA is 48.
• Tensor cores: AMD has none listed; NVIDIA has 192.
• Pixel rate: AMD is 192.0 GPixel/s; NVIDIA is 99.84 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: AMD is 480.0 GTexel/s; NVIDIA is 299.5 GTexel/s.
• FP32: AMD is 15.36 TFLOPS; NVIDIA is 19.17 TFLOPS.
• FP16: AMD is 15.36 TFLOPS (1:1); NVIDIA is 19.17 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: AMD is 55 W; NVIDIA is 70 W.
• Slot width: AMD is IGP; NVIDIA is Dual-slot.
• Suggested PSU: AMD has none; NVIDIA is 250 W.
• Bus interface: AMD is PCIe 5.0 x16; NVIDIA is PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display outputs: AMD is "Portable Device Dependent"; NVIDIA is 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: AMD has no length, height, or width listed; NVIDIA is 168 mm long and 69 mm high.
• Release date: AMD is December 31, 2025; NVIDIA is March 20, 2023.
• Predecessor: AMD is Polaris Mobile; NVIDIA is Workstation Ampere.
• Successor: AMD has none; NVIDIA is Blackwell PRO W.
• Generation: AMD is Navi Mobile (RX 8000M); NVIDIA is Workstation Ada.
• Series: AMD has no series listed; NVIDIA is GeForce 40-series.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score in the database?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has an average benchmark score of 117,088, based on its Geekbench OpenCL score of 124,812 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 109,364. The AMD Radeon 8065S has no recorded benchmark scores, giving it an average of 0.

Q: How do the two cards compare in FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation delivers 19.17 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is 24.8% higher than the AMD Radeon 8065S's 15.36 TFLOPS.

Q: What are the memory configurations?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has 20 GB of dedicated GDDR6 memory on a 160-bit bus with 280.0 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD Radeon 8065S uses system-shared memory with no dedicated VRAM, and its bandwidth is listed as system-dependent.

Q: Which card has higher pixel and texture fill rates?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a pixel rate of 192.0 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 480.0 GTexel/s. The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a pixel rate of 99.84 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 299.5 GTexel/s. The AMD card leads by 92.3% in pixel rate and 60.3% in texture rate.

Q: What is the thermal design power of each card?

A: The AMD Radeon 8065S has a TDP of 55 W, while the NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation has a TDP of 70 W. The NVIDIA card has a suggested PSU of 250 W, while the AMD card lists no suggested PSU.

Q: How does the NVIDIA card compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The NVIDIA RTX 4000 SFF Ada Generation is 0.3% behind the NVIDIA GB10 (117,393), 1.6% behind the AMD Radeon PRO W7700 (118,976), 2.4% ahead of the NVIDIA Tesla V100 SXM2 16 GB (114,395), and 2.8% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX A5500 Mobile (113,944).