AMD Radeon HD 6950 vs AMD Radeon HD 8750M Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 is the clear performance winner, taking the only head-to-head benchmark with a 4% lead in Geekbench OpenCL (6210 vs 5970). This desktop card, built on TeraScale 3, delivers substantially more raw compute and memory bandwidth than the mobile HD 8750M. If you are assembling a legacy desktop rig and need the stronger compute performance, the HD 6950 is the pick from the data. The HD 8750M, with its GCN 1.0 architecture, brings modern API support including DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170, which the HD 6950 lacks entirely (it only reaches DirectX 11.2 and OpenGL 4.4 with no Vulkan). Therefore, for a system that prioritizes newer software compatibility over peak OpenCL throughput, the HD 8750M is the more practical choice, despite scoring lower. The data shows a trade-off: raw speed on the HD 6950 versus architectural longevity on the HD 8750M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher OpenCL benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6950 scores 6210 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 4% higher than the 5970 scored by the AMD Radeon HD 8750M.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The HD 6950 sits at the 36th percentile of all GPUs, with its closest rival being the AMD FirePro W600 at 6223 (a -0.2% delta). The HD 8750M sits at the 34th percentile, with its closest rival being the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 at 5982 (a -0.2% delta).

Q: Which GPU supports Vulkan?

A: Only the AMD Radeon HD 8750M supports Vulkan, specifically version 1.2.170. The AMD Radeon HD 6950 has no Vulkan support listed in its API specifications.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The HD 6950 has a memory bandwidth of 160.0 GB/s, which is over five times higher than the 28.80 GB/s offered by the HD 8750M.

Q: Are both GPUs the same physical size?

A: No. The HD 6950 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 286 mm in length, while the HD 8750M has no listed dimensions, slot width, or power connectors, indicating it is a mobile chip.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density despite being on an older process?

A: The HD 8750M has a higher transistor density at 12.3M / mm² on a 28 nm process, compared to the HD 6950's 6.8M / mm² on a 40 nm process.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is fundamental. The HD 6950 uses the Cayman chip based on TeraScale 3 architecture, belonging to the Northern Islands (HD 6900) generation. In contrast, the HD 8750M uses the Mars chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, from the Solar System (HD 8700M) generation. This shift from TeraScale 3 to GCN 1.0 represents a major design overhaul. The HD 6950 packs 2,640 million transistors on a 389 mm² die, while the HD 8750M integrates 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The newer 28 nm process node allows the HD 8750M to achieve a transistor density of 12.3M / mm², nearly double the HD 6950's 6.8M / mm² on 40 nm. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

The compute resources differ drastically. The HD 6950 features 1408 shading units, 88 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster output pipelines (ROPs). The HD 8750M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. Neither GPU includes ray tracing or tensor cores. API support reveals the generational divide: the HD 6950 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan. The HD 8750M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The HD 8750M also has a boost clock of 825 MHz (base 775 MHz), a feature absent from the HD 6950's specifications. The predecessor and successor names also differ: the HD 6950's predecessor was Evergreen and its successor was Southern Islands, while the HD 8750M's predecessor was London and its successor was Gem System.

Specification Differences

The specification tables show clear separation. On process and size, the HD 6950 uses a 40 nm node with a 389 mm² die, while the HD 8750M uses 28 nm with a 77 mm² die. Transistor counts are 2,640 million versus 950 million. Memory configurations are entirely different: the HD 6950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus delivering 160.0 GB/s, whereas the HD 8750M has 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus delivering 28.80 GB/s. Memory clocks also differ, with the HD 6950 running at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) and the HD 8750M at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).

Compute throughput measures favor the HD 6950 overwhelmingly. Pixel rate is 25.60 GPixel/s versus 6.600 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 70.40 GTexel/s versus 19.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.253 TFLOPS versus 633.6 GFLOPS. The HD 6950 draws 200 W TDP, requires a 550 W suggested PSU, and uses 2x 6-pin power connectors. The HD 8750M lists no TDP, no power connectors, and no suggested PSU. The HD 6950 is a dual-slot card at 286 mm in length, while the HD 8750M has no physical dimensions listed. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 2.0 x16 for the HD 6950 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 for the HD 8750M. Display outputs are only specified for the HD 6950 (2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2). The HD 6950 carries a launch MSRP of 299 USD, while the HD 8750M has no listed launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only head-to-head benchmark available is Geekbench OpenCL, and the HD 6950 wins it. The HD 6950 scores 6210 against the HD 8750M's 5970, a delta of 4%. While the percentage gap appears modest, the underlying hardware differences are not. The HD 6950 achieves this score with more than three times the shading units (1408 vs 384) and over five times the memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s). The HD 8750M's 5970 score puts it in the 34th percentile of all GPUs, while the HD 6950's 6210 score places it in the 36th percentile. In terms of nearest rivals, the HD 6950 is essentially tied with the AMD FirePro W600 (6223, -0.2%), and it sits just 0.9% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER AD102 (6270) and the RTX 5070 Ti SUPER (6270). The HD 8750M is similarly tied with the NVIDIA Quadro K4000 (5982, -0.2%) and the Quadro K4000M (5986, -0.3%), while holding a 0.3% edge over the AMD Radeon HD 8730M (5955). This clustering shows that both GPUs are extremely close to their respective direct competitors, but the HD 6950's absolute score is higher.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 6950 wins in every raw performance category measured. It has higher pixel rate (25.60 GPixel/s vs 6.600 GPixel/s), higher texture rate (70.40 GTexel/s vs 19.80 GTexel/s), higher FP32 throughput (2.253 TFLOPS vs 633.6 GFLOPS), and higher memory bandwidth (160.0 GB/s vs 28.80 GB/s). It also has double the memory capacity (2 GB vs 1024 MB) and a wider memory bus (256-bit vs 128-bit). The benchmark win in Geekbench OpenCL (6210 vs 5970) directly reflects these advantages. For any workload that is compute-bound or bandwidth-bound, the HD 6950 is the stronger option. Its dual-slot design with 2x 6-pin power connectors indicates it is meant for desktop systems where power and cooling are not constrained.

The AMD Radeon HD 8750M wins in architectural modernity and API compatibility. It supports DirectX 12 (11_1) versus the HD 6950's DirectX 11.2 (11_0). It supports OpenGL 4.6 versus the HD 6950's OpenGL 4.4. It uniquely supports Vulkan 1.2.170, which the HD 6950 cannot use at all. The HD 8750M also has a boost clock mechanism (825 MHz boost over 775 MHz base), allowing dynamic frequency scaling. Its 28 nm process and higher transistor density (12.3M / mm² vs 6.8M / mm²) make it a more efficient design, though TDP is not listed. Its smaller die (77 mm² vs 389 mm²) and lack of power connectors suggest it is intended for mobile or low-power integrated applications. For users running modern software that requires Vulkan or DirectX 12 features, the HD 8750M is the only viable choice between these two, despite its lower benchmark score. In summary, the HD 6950 wins where compute and memory speed matter most, while the HD 8750M wins where software compatibility and process efficiency take priority.