AMD Radeon HD 8690M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a decisive picture: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 wins the only shared benchmark test outright, with 1 win against 0 for the AMD Radeon HD 8690M. The GeForce GTX 1650’s average benchmark score of 7472 places it in the 40th percentile of all GPUs, while the Radeon HD 8690M sits at a 36th percentile with an average score of 6137. This means the GTX 1650 is not merely faster in one test; it is positioned a full four percentile points higher in the overall distribution, indicating a consistent performance advantage across the database’s recorded measurements.

The use-case split is therefore straightforward. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear choice for any workload that relies on the OpenCL API, as it delivers a score of 29629 compared to the HD 8690M’s 6137, a gap of 382.8 percent. This is not a marginal lead; it is a category-level difference. For users running compute-heavy applications, video encoding, or any task that leverages GPU acceleration through OpenCL, the GTX 1650 is categorically superior. The Radeon HD 8690M, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark win in the database, meaning there is no measured scenario where it outperforms the GTX 1650. Its only benchmark entry, Geekbench OpenCL, shows a score that is roughly one-fifth of the GTX 1650’s result.

For legacy DirectX workloads, the GTX 1650’s individual PassMark scores further reinforce its dominance: it records 124 in DirectX 9, 58 in DirectX 11, 39 in DirectX 10, and 35 in DirectX 12. While the HD 8690M has no recorded scores in these tests, the GTX 1650’s pattern shows strong performance in older APIs, which is relevant for users running older game titles or legacy productivity software. The GTX 1650 also posts a PassMark G3D score of 7880 and a G2D score of 561, alongside a GPU compute score of 3048, none of which have counterparts in the HD 8690M’s data. In short, the GTX 1650 wins every measurable category, and the HD 8690M’s only role in this comparison is as a lower baseline.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design eras and philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU117 chip fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. It packs 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon HD 8690M uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture with the Sun chip, manufactured on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, but with only 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die, giving a density of 12.3M per mm². The GTX 1650 therefore has nearly seven times the transistor count and more than three times the die area, reflecting a much more complex and modern design.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The GTX 1650 runs at a base clock of 1485 MHz and a boost clock of 1665 MHz, while the HD 8690M operates at 925 MHz base and 975 MHz boost. Higher clocks, combined with the architectural advances of Turing over GCN 1.0, explain a large portion of the performance gap. The GTX 1650 also supports a broader API set: DirectX 12 (12_1) versus the HD 8690M’s DirectX 12 (11_1), and Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 1650’s newer API levels matter for modern game compatibility and feature support.

Memory architecture is another major divider. The GTX 1650 uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8690M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 64-bit bus, yielding only 32.00 GB/s. That is a fourfold difference in bandwidth, which directly impacts texture-heavy scenes and high-resolution workloads. The GTX 1650 also has a much wider execution engine: 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, versus the HD 8690M’s 320 shaders, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.984 TFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS, a 4.8x difference. The GTX 1650 also supports FP16 at 5.967 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, a feature the HD 8690M lacks entirely.

The bus interface differs as well: PCIe 3.0 x16 on the GTX 1650 versus PCIe 3.0 x8 on the HD 8690M. The GTX 1650 has a TDP of 75 W, requires no power connectors, and recommends a 250 W PSU, while the HD 8690M has no recorded TDP or power specifications. The GTX 1650 is a dual-slot card with dimensions of 229 mm length, 111 mm height, and 35 mm width, while the HD 8690M has no recorded physical dimensions. The GTX 1650 offers display outputs (1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a), whereas the HD 8690M has no recorded display outputs. Both are end-of-life products, but the GTX 1650 was released on 2019-04-22, while the HD 8690M dates to 2013-02-28, a six-year gap in technology.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the results are stark. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 scores 29629, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M scores 6137. This yields a delta of 382.8 percent in favor of the GTX 1650. To put that in perspective, the GTX 1650 is nearly five times faster in this compute test. This is not a subtle advantage; it is a generational leap. The GTX 1650’s nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (average score 7447, delta 0.3 percent), Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, 0.4 percent), AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, 0.6 percent), and Intel Arc A310 (7550, -1 percent). These rivals are all within 1 percent of the GTX 1650’s average score, meaning the GTX 1650 is competitive with a tight cluster of mid-range GPUs.

The HD 8690M, by contrast, sits in a lower tier. Its nearest rivals are the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117, 0.3 percent), NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078, 1 percent), NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077, 1 percent), and AMD Radeon HD 6950 (6210, -1.2 percent). All of these are within 1.2 percent of the HD 8690M’s average score of 6137. The gap between the two GPUs’ rival clusters is roughly 1300 points, which aligns with the 382.8 percent delta in the OpenCL test. The data indicates that the GTX 1650 competes in a performance bracket that is about 20 percent higher than the HD 8690M’s bracket, based on average benchmark scores (7472 versus 6137, a difference of 21.8 percent).

Beyond OpenCL, the GTX 1650 has a full suite of PassMark scores that the HD 8690M lacks, so no further head-to-head comparisons are possible. However, the GTX 1650’s individual scores show internal consistency: its DirectX 11 score of 58 is higher than its DirectX 10 score of 39, which is higher than its DirectX 12 score of 35, suggesting that older API workloads benefit from the card’s architecture. Its PassMark G3D score of 7880 is the strongest single metric, and its GPU compute score of 3048 indicates solid parallel processing capability. The HD 8690M has no such data, so the only recorded comparison is the OpenCL blowout.

Specification Differences

The specification table reveals every area where the two GPUs diverge. Process node: 12 nm versus 28 nm. Transistors: 4,700 million versus 690 million. Die size: 200 mm² versus 56 mm². Transistor density: 23.5M per mm² versus 12.3M per mm². Base clock: 1485 MHz versus 925 MHz. Boost clock: 1665 MHz versus 975 MHz. Memory clock: 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (4 Gbps effective). Memory size: 4 GB versus 2 GB. Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 64 bit. Memory bandwidth: 128.1 GB/s versus 32.00 GB/s. Shading units: 896 versus 320. TMUs: 56 versus 20. ROPs: 32 versus 8. Pixel rate: 53.28 GPixel/s versus 7.800 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 93.24 GTexel/s versus 19.50 GTexel/s. FP32 compute: 2.984 TFLOPS versus 624.0 GFLOPS. FP16 compute: 5.967 TFLOPS versus null (not supported). TDP: 75 W versus null. Slot width: dual-slot versus null. Power connectors: none versus null. Suggested PSU: 250 W versus null. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a versus null. DirectX version: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_1). Vulkan version: 1.4 versus 1.2.170. Release date: 2019-04-22 versus 2013-02-28. Predecessor: GeForce 10 versus London. Successor: GeForce 20 versus Gem System.

The GTX 1650 also has a launch MSRP of 149 USD, which is recorded in the database; the HD 8690M has no launch MSRP. Physical dimensions are recorded for the GTX 1650 (229 mm length, 111 mm height, 35 mm width) but are null for the HD 8690M. The only fields where the two are identical are the manufacturer (both use TSMC as foundry), both are end-of-life, and both have no RT cores or tensor cores.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7472, while the AMD Radeon HD 8690M has an average score of 6137. The GTX 1650 also sits at the 40th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 36th percentile for the HD 8690M.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the only shared benchmark test?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 scores 29629, and the HD 8690M scores 6137, a delta of 382.8 percent in favor of the GTX 1650.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each GPU?

A: For the GTX 1650, the nearest rival is the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (average score 7447, delta 0.3 percent), followed by Intel UHD Graphics 750 (7441, 0.4 percent) and AMD Radeon R7 350 (7425, 0.6 percent). For the HD 8690M, the nearest rival is the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 (6117, 0.3 percent), followed by NVIDIA RTX A400 (6078, 1 percent) and NVIDIA GeForce MX230 (6077, 1 percent).

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1650 has 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth from a 128-bit bus with 4 GB of GDDR5, while the HD 8690M has 32.00 GB/s from a 64-bit bus with 2 GB of GDDR5. The GTX 1650 has exactly four times the bandwidth.

Q: What are the architectural generations of these GPUs?

A: The GTX 1650 uses the Turing architecture with the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process, while the HD 8690M uses GCN 1.0 with the Sun chip on a 28 nm process. The GTX 1650 has 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, versus 690 million on 56 mm² for the HD 8690M.

Q: Which GPU supports newer API versions?

A: The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 8690M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6. The GTX 1650 also supports FP16 compute at 5.967 TFLOPS, which the HD 8690M does not.