AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes a single direct comparison between these two mobile graphics solutions, and it is a decisive one. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76,904 points, while the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 scores 53,757 points. That is a 43.1% advantage for the RX 6650M XT, a substantial gap that places the two parts in entirely different performance tiers despite their shared 8 GB memory capacity.

The RX 6650M XT sits at the 91st percentile among all GPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 76,904. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D at 77,712 (only 1% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 6850M XT at 78,940 (2.6% higher), and two NVIDIA Tesla P100 variants, the 12 GB model at 79,396 (3.1% higher) and the 16 GB model at 79,605 (3.4% higher). This clustering shows the RX 6650M XT is competitive with high-end workstation and enthusiast cards, trailing the fastest of these rivals by only a few percentage points.

The Radeon Pro Vega 48, by contrast, records an average benchmark score of 60,140, placing it at the 88th percentile. Its nearest rivals paint a different picture. The Intel Arc Pro A60 scores 60,326, essentially a dead heat at 0.3% higher. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 scores 60,347, also 0.3% higher, an unusual pairing that reflects the averaging of multiple benchmark types for that card rather than raw gaming performance. The AMD Radeon PRO V710 trails at 58,657, which is 2.5% lower, and the NVIDIA P102-100 scores 58,528, 2.8% lower. The Vega 48 is therefore positioned in a crowded mid-pack, while the RX 6650M XT sits much higher in the distribution.

Beyond the single OpenCL head-to-head, the database also records the Vega 48's performance in two other APIs. Its Geekbench Metal score is 69,010, and its Geekbench Vulkan score is 57,653. The OpenCL score of 53,757 is the lowest of the three, suggesting the Vega 48's performance varies noticeably depending on the software interface. The RX 6650M XT has no recorded Metal or Vulkan scores, so the only apples-to-apples comparison available is OpenCL, where the newer card wins outright. Benchmark results indicate the RX 6650M XT holds a commanding lead in the one shared test, and the percentile data reinforces that it belongs in a higher performance class altogether.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different eras of AMD design. The RX 6650M XT uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The Radeon Pro Vega 48 uses the Vega 10 chip on the older GCN 5.0 architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The manufacturing difference is stark: the 7 nm node allows 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The 14 nm Vega 10 packs 12,500 million transistors onto a much larger 495 mm² die, for a density of only 25.3 million per square millimeter. Despite having roughly 13% more transistors, the Vega 48's die is more than twice the physical size, and the data shows the architectural efficiency of RDNA 2.0 wins out.

The shading resources tell an interesting story. The Vega 48 has 3,072 shading units, 192 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output pipelines. The RX 6650M XT has fewer shading units at 2,048, fewer TMUs at 128, but the same 64 ROPs. Even with fewer execution units, the RX 6650M XT achieves much higher pixel and texture throughput. Its pixel rate is 154.6 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s for the Vega 48, and its texture rate is 309.2 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute figures follow the same pattern: 9.896 TFLOPS for the RX 6650M XT against 7.373 TFLOPS for the Vega 48. FP16 performance doubles in both cases, with the RX 6650M XT reaching 19.79 TFLOPS (2:1) and the Vega 48 reaching 14.75 TFLOPS (2:1). Clock speeds explain part of this. The RX 6650M XT runs at a base clock of 2068 MHz, a boost clock of 2416 MHz, and a game clock of 2162 MHz. The Vega 48's core clocks are not recorded in the database, but its memory clock is listed at 786 MHz with 1572 Mbps effective, far below the RX 6650M XT's 2000 MHz memory clock at 16 Gbps effective.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The RX 6650M XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 48 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a massive 2048-bit bus, delivering 402.4 GB/s. The Vega 48's bandwidth advantage is significant, roughly 57% higher, which reflects the HBM2 design's wide bus approach. However, that advantage does not translate into a benchmark win. The RX 6650M XT compensates with a much faster memory clock and more efficient architecture. The RX 6650M XT also features 32 ray tracing cores, while the Vega 48 has none, and it supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) compared to the Vega 48's DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the RX 6650M XT supports Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.3 for the Vega 48. The bus interface also differs: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 6650M XT, PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Vega 48. Both are integrated graphics packages with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The RX 6650M XT carries a 120 W TDP, while the Vega 48's TDP is not recorded. The RX 6650M XT is part of the Radeon RX 6000 series in the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation, while the Vega 48 belongs to the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner in raw compute performance. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT beats the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 by 43.1% in the Geekbench OpenCL test, and its 91st percentile standing versus the Vega 48's 88th percentile confirms the ranking. The RX 6650M XT is also a newer, more efficient design: 7 nm versus 14 nm, RDNA 2.0 versus GCN 5.0, and a die of 237 mm² versus 495 mm². It delivers higher pixel rate, higher texture rate, higher FP32 throughput, and it adds ray tracing support that the Vega 48 completely lacks. The Vega 48 does hold one notable advantage: memory bandwidth. Its HBM2 implementation on a 2048-bit bus provides 402.4 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s for the RX 6650M XT, a 57% gap that could matter in bandwidth-sensitive workloads. But the single recorded benchmark shows that advantage did not help in OpenCL compute.

Who should pick which, strictly from the data? Users who prioritize raw OpenCL compute performance, modern API support including DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4, and ray tracing capability should choose the RX 6650M XT. Its higher clock speeds, smaller process node, and superior benchmark score make it the better all-around performer. Users who need maximum memory bandwidth above all else, or who are constrained to a Mac environment given the Vega 48's Radeon Pro Mac generation, might still find the Vega 48 relevant. The Vega 48 also has a higher transistor count at 12,500 million versus 11,060 million, but that does not translate into better results. The release dates reinforce the generational gap: the RX 6650M XT launched in January 2022, while the Vega 48 launched in March 2019. Both are end-of-life products, but the RX 6650M XT is the more modern and more capable design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M XT scores 76,904 points, which is 43.1% higher than the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48's score of 53,757.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same amount of memory?

A: Yes, both have 8 GB, but the memory types differ. The RX 6650M XT uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the Vega 48 uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus.

Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro Vega 48 has 402.4 GB/s of bandwidth, substantially higher than the RX 6650M XT's 256.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the RX 6650M XT support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6650M XT has 32 ray tracing cores. The Vega 48 has no ray tracing cores recorded in the database.

Q: How do their API support levels compare?

A: The RX 6650M XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 48 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The RX 6650M XT is built on a 7 nm process at TSMC, while the Vega 48 is built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6650M XT wins in almost every measurable category. It wins the only direct benchmark comparison, the Geekbench OpenCL test, by 43.1%. It wins on pixel rate at 154.6 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s. It wins on texture rate at 309.2 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s. It wins on FP32 compute at 9.896 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS, and on FP16 compute at 19.79 TFLOPS versus 14.75 TFLOPS. It wins on process technology with 7 nm versus 14 nm, and on transistor density at 46.7 million per square millimeter versus 25.3 million. It wins on clock speeds with a base clock of 2068 MHz and a boost clock of 2416 MHz, though the Vega 48's core clocks are not recorded. It wins on API support with DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4. It wins on ray tracing capability with 32 ray tracing cores. It even wins on bus interface generation with PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16, though the Vega 48 has more lanes. The RX 6650M XT also has a lower TDP at 120 W, though the Vega 48's TDP is not recorded for comparison.

The Vega 48 wins in a few specific areas. It has more shading units at 3,072 versus 2,048, more texture mapping units at 192 versus 128, and more transistors at 12,500 million versus 11,060 million. It has significantly higher memory bandwidth at 402.4 GB/s versus 256.0 GB/s, a 146.4 GB/s advantage. It has a wider memory bus at 2048 bits versus 128 bits. It also has a larger die at 495 mm² versus 237 mm², though that is not an advantage in practical terms. The Vega 48's Metal benchmark score of 69,010 and Vulkan score of 57,653 suggest it performs better in those APIs than in OpenCL, but since the RX 6650M XT has no recorded scores in those tests, no direct comparison is possible. The Vega 48's use case appears to be memory-bandwidth-bound workloads, where its HBM2 implementation could theoretically shine, even if the OpenCL result does not reflect that.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every major specification. The RX 6650M XT uses the Navi 23 chip with RDNA 2.0 architecture, while the Vega 48 uses Vega 10 with GCN 5.0. The process nodes are 7 nm at TSMC for the RX 6650M XT and 14 nm at GlobalFoundries for the Vega 48. Transistor counts are 11,060 million versus 12,500 million, and die sizes are 237 mm² versus 495 mm². Transistor density is 46.7 million per square millimeter versus 25.3 million. The RX 6650M XT has a base clock of 2068 MHz, a boost clock of 2416 MHz, and a game clock of 2162 MHz; the Vega 48 has no recorded core clocks. Memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the RX 6650M XT versus 786 MHz (1572 Mbps effective) for the Vega 48.

Memory configurations differ in type, bus width, and bandwidth. The RX 6650M XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 256.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Vega 48 has 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 402.4 GB/s. Compute resources differ with 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 32 ray tracing cores, and 64 ROPs for the RX 6650M XT, versus 3,072 shading units, 192 TMUs, no ray tracing cores, and 64 ROPs for the Vega 48. Pixel rates are 154.6 GPixel/s versus 76.80 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 309.2 GTexel/s versus 230.4 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 9.896 TFLOPS versus 7.373 TFLOPS, and FP16 performance is 19.79 TFLOPS versus 14.75 TFLOPS. The RX 6650M XT has a TDP of 120 W; the Vega 48's TDP is not recorded. Both are IGP form factors with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RX 6650M XT and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the Vega 48. API support shows DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 for the RX 6650M XT, while the Vega 48 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The RX 6650M XT is from the Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) generation with a release date of January 2022, while the Vega 48 is from the Radeon Pro Mac (Vega Series) generation with a release date of March 2019. Both are end-of-life products.