AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs AMD Radeon RX 6650M Comparison

# AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 are two end-of-life GPUs from different eras and design philosophies. The RX 6650M is a 7 nm mobile part built on RDNA 2.0, while the Pro WX 8200 is a 14 nm workstation card using GCN 5.0. Their average benchmark scores sit close—71,768 for the RX 6650M versus 69,870 for the Pro WX 8200—placing them in the 91st and 90th percentiles of all GPUs, respectively. The head-to-head results show a split: the Pro WX 8200 wins OpenCL by 5.7%, while the RX 6650M takes Vulkan by 12.5%. This is a classic clash between a modern, power-efficient mobile chip and an older, bandwidth-heavy workstation board.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M leads with an average benchmark score of 71,768, compared to 69,870 for the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200. That is a difference of roughly 1,900 points, or about 2.7% in favor of the RX 6650M.

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in OpenCL performance?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 69,774 versus 65,800 for the RX 6650M, a 5.7% advantage for the workstation card.

Q: Which GPU performs better in Vulkan?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M dominates Vulkan with a score of 77,735, beating the Pro WX 8200's 69,076 by 12.5%. This is the RX 6650M's largest win in the head-to-head.

Q: What memory types and capacities do these cards use?

A: Both have 8 GB of memory, but the RX 6650M uses GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Pro WX 8200 uses HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus with 512.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 6650M has a 120 W TDP and requires no power connectors, as it is an integrated GPU for laptops. The Pro WX 8200 has a 230 W TDP, needs a 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin power connector setup, and a suggested 550 W PSU.

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute throughput?

A: The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 offers 10.75 TFLOPS FP32, which is higher than the RX 6650M's 8.659 TFLOPS. However, the RX 6650M achieves this at a much lower TDP.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M is built on RDNA 2.0, using the Navi 23 chip manufactured on TSMC's 7 nm process. It packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million transistors per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 uses GCN 5.0 with the Vega 10 chip, fabricated on GlobalFoundries' 14 nm process. That chip holds 12,500 million transistors on a much larger 495 mm² die, giving a density of 25.3 million transistors per mm².

The RX 6650M features 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The Pro WX 8200 has double the shading units at 3,584, double the TMUs at 224, and the same 64 ROPs, but no ray tracing cores at all. This reflects the architectural shift: RDNA 2.0 brings hardware ray tracing and a newer DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) API, while GCN 5.0 tops out at DirectX 12 (12_1). The RX 6650M also supports Vulkan 1.4 versus Vulkan 1.3 on the Pro WX 8200, though both offer OpenGL 4.6.

Memory architecture could not be more different. The RX 6650M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Pro WX 8200 uses 8 GB of HBM2 on a 2048-bit bus, delivering over twice the bandwidth at 512.0 GB/s. Clock speeds also diverge sharply: the RX 6650M runs at a 2068 MHz base and 2416 MHz boost, while the Pro WX 8200 operates at 1200 MHz base and 1500 MHz boost. The mobile chip compensates for its narrower memory bus with much higher clocks.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the better all-around performer for modern graphics workloads. It holds a higher average benchmark score (71,768 versus 69,870), ranks one percentile point higher (91st versus 90th), and wins the Vulkan test decisively by 12.5%. Vulkan is the API used in many contemporary games and compute applications, making the RX 6650M the more future-proof choice despite its mobile form factor.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200, however, remains the pick for OpenCL-heavy workflows. Its 5.7% OpenCL advantage over the RX 6650M, combined with 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth and higher FP32 throughput (10.75 TFLOPS), makes it a legitimate workstation tool. The Pro WX 8200 also offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs versus the RX 6650M's portable-device-dependent outputs, which matters for multi-monitor setups.

For a desktop workstation, the Pro WX 8200's dual-slot design, 230 W TDP, and 550 W PSU requirement are practical considerations. The RX 6650M is an integrated GPU for laptops, with 120 W TDP and no power connectors, so it suits mobile systems. If you need raw compute for OpenCL and have the power budget, the Pro WX 8200 wins. If you want modern API support and better Vulkan performance, the RX 6650M is the clear choice.

Specification Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M and AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 differ across nearly every core specification. The RX 6650M uses the Navi 23 chip on a 7 nm process from TSMC, while the Pro WX 8200 uses Vega 10 on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are close—11,060 million versus 12,500 million—but the die sizes are not: 237 mm² versus 495 mm². The RX 6650M has a transistor density of 46.7 million per mm², nearly double the Pro WX 8200's 25.3 million per mm².

Clock speeds favor the RX 6650M heavily: base 2068 MHz versus 1200 MHz, boost 2416 MHz versus 1500 MHz, and game clock 2222 MHz (the Pro WX 8200 has no game clock). Memory clocks also differ, with the RX 6650M running at 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1000 MHz (2 Gbps effective) on the Pro WX 8200. The Pro WX 8200 compensates with a 2048-bit bus versus 128-bit, giving it 512.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Compute resources are split: the Pro WX 8200 has 3,584 shading units and 224 TMUs, while the RX 6650M has 1,792 and 112, respectively. Both have 64 ROPs. The RX 6650M adds 28 ray tracing cores; the Pro WX 8200 has none. Pixel rates are 154.6 GPixel/s for the RX 6650M versus 96.00 GPixel/s for the Pro WX 8200, but texture rates reverse: 270.6 GTexel/s versus 336.0 GTexel/s. FP32 throughput is 8.659 TFLOPS versus 10.75 TFLOPS, and FP16 is 17.32 TFLOPS versus 21.50 TFLOPS (both 2:1).

Power and physical specs diverge widely. The RX 6650M is an IGP with 120 W TDP and no power connectors; the Pro WX 8200 is dual-slot, 230 W TDP, with 1x 6-pin plus 1x 8-pin connectors and a suggested 550 W PSU. The Pro WX 8200 is 267 mm long and 111 mm tall, while the RX 6650M has no listed dimensions. Bus interfaces are PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are portable-device-dependent on the RX 6650M versus 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a on the Pro WX 8200. Release dates are January 2022 for the RX 6650M and August 2018 for the Pro WX 8200.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench results show a clear split between the two GPUs. In OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 scores 69,774 against the RX 6650M's 65,800, giving the workstation card a 5.7% lead. This aligns with the Pro WX 8200's higher FP32 throughput (10.75 TFLOPS) and vastly superior memory bandwidth (512.0 GB/s), both of which are critical for compute-heavy OpenCL workloads.

In Vulkan, the tables turn dramatically. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M scores 77,735 versus 69,076 for the Pro WX 8200, a 12.5% advantage. This is the single largest performance gap in the head-to-head. The RX 6650M's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with its modern Vulkan 1.4 support and higher clock speeds (2416 MHz boost versus 1500 MHz), likely drives this win. Even though the Pro WX 8200 has more shading units, the RX 6650M's architectural efficiency and API support make it substantially faster in Vulkan.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the RX 6650M's average score of 71,768 places it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (72,098, -0.5%) and AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (72,379, -0.8%). The Pro WX 8200's average of 69,870 sits in the 90th percentile, trading blows with the NVIDIA Quadro P6000 (69,986, -0.2%) and NVIDIA RTX A3000 Mobile (70,140, -0.4%). Notably, both GPUs are near the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE, which scores 70,829—the RX 6650M is 1.3% ahead, while the Pro WX 8200 is 1.4% behind.

The wins are evenly split at one apiece, but the magnitude differs. A 12.5% Vulkan win for the RX 6650M outweighs a 5.7% OpenCL win for the Pro WX 8200 in terms of raw performance difference. For users running Vulkan-based games or compute, the RX 6650M is the stronger performer by a significant margin.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins in modern API workloads, particularly Vulkan. Its 12.5% Vulkan advantage over the Pro WX 8200 is substantial and makes it the better choice for gaming or compute applications that leverage Vulkan. The RX 6650M also excels in efficiency: 120 W TDP versus 230 W, no power connectors required, and a 7 nm process versus 14 nm. For laptop users or those prioritizing low power draw, the RX 6650M is the only viable option between the two. Its higher clock speeds (2416 MHz boost versus 1500 MHz) and ray tracing support (28 RT cores) are additional advantages for modern workloads.

The AMD Radeon Pro WX 8200 wins in OpenCL performance, with a 5.7% lead over the RX 6650M. This makes it the stronger choice for OpenCL-based professional applications like rendering, scientific computing, or video processing. Its 512.0 GB/s memory bandwidth—more than double the RX 6650M's 224.0 GB/s—is a clear asset for memory-bound tasks. The Pro WX 8200 also offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs, enabling multi-display workstation setups that the RX 6650M cannot match with its portable-device-dependent outputs. Higher FP32 (10.75 TFLOPS) and FP16 (21.50 TFLOPS) throughput further reinforce its compute credentials.

In summary, the RX 6650M is the pick for Vulkan-centric gaming, modern API support, and power-sensitive mobile systems. The Pro WX 8200 is the pick for OpenCL-heavy professional workloads, memory-bandwidth-intensive tasks, and desktop workstations requiring multiple display outputs. Both are end-of-life products, but they serve different niches well—the RX 6650M as a modern mobile solution, the Pro WX 8200 as a legacy workstation workhorse.