AMD Radeon RX 5700 vs AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark comparison between the AMD Radeon RX 5700 and the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is decisively lopsided, with the RX 6650 XT securing 9 wins out of 11 recorded tests. The RX 5700 manages only 2 victories, but one of those is a statistical tie that reveals a surprising strength in a modern API workload.

The most notable RX 5700 triumph comes in the Geekbench OpenCL test, where it scores 69,603 versus the RX 6650 XT's 10,111. That is a delta of 588.4% in favor of the older card, an enormous margin that dominates the entire head-to-head table. This single result suggests that the RX 5700's compute pipeline, built on a wider memory interface, retains a massive advantage in certain OpenCL workloads. The other RX 5700 win is in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where it scores 1,862 against 1,859, a mere 0.2% difference. While this is technically a win, it is within measurement noise and indicates near-identical performance in this specific DirectX 12 test.

The RX 6650 XT's wins are spread across a wide range of workloads, but they are not uniformly dominant. Its largest margin comes in PassMark DirectX 11, where it scores 169 versus 101, a 40.2% lead. This is a substantial gap and points to a significant architectural efficiency improvement in the newer card's handling of legacy DirectX 11 code. The next largest win is in PassMark DirectX 10, with a score of 109 against 87, a 20.2% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6650 XT scores 81,306 versus 64,166, a 21.1% lead, showing a clear edge in modern cross-platform graphics APIs. The PassMark G3D score also favors the newer card, 17,166 versus 14,314, a 16.6% improvement. Geekbench Metal shows a 12.1% lead (97,969 versus 86,079), and PassMark GPU Compute shows a 13.5% lead (7,532 versus 6,517). Smaller but consistent wins appear in PassMark DirectX 12 (62 versus 54, a 12.9% delta), PassMark G2D (918 versus 877, a 4.5% delta), and PassMark DirectX 9 (215 versus 209, a 2.8% delta).

The pattern is clear: the RX 6650 XT wins almost every test, but the magnitude varies wildly. In DirectX 11 and DirectX 10, it is crushing. In Vulkan and Metal, it is solidly ahead. In DirectX 9 and G2D, the wins are narrow. The RX 5700's OpenCL result is an outlier that does not reflect its overall standing, and its 3DMark Steel Nomad result shows it can still match the newer card in one specific DX12 scenario.

Architecture Differences

The two cards belong to different RDNA generations, which explains the performance split. The RX 5700 uses the Navi 10 chip built on RDNA 1.0 architecture, while the RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip on RDNA 2.0. Both are fabricated on TSMC's 7 nm process, but the transistor counts differ: the RX 5700 has 10,300 million transistors on a 251 mm² die, while the RX 6650 XT has 11,060 million on a smaller 237 mm² die. This yields a higher transistor density for the newer card, 46.7M per mm² versus 41.0M per mm².

The core configurations are surprisingly different. The RX 5700 has more shading units (2,304 versus 2,048), more texture mapping units (144 versus 128), and the same number of render output units (64). However, the RX 6650 XT introduces 32 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the RX 5700. This is the defining architectural addition of RDNA 2.0. The clock speeds also diverge sharply. The RX 5700 has a base clock of 1,465 MHz, a game clock of 1,625 MHz, and a boost clock of 1,725 MHz. The RX 6650 XT runs much higher, with a base of 2,055 MHz, a game clock of 2,410 MHz, and a boost of 2,635 MHz. These higher clocks more than compensate for the fewer shading units and TMUs.

Memory configurations differ in bus width but not capacity. Both cards have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the RX 5700 uses a 256-bit bus delivering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RX 6650 XT uses a 128-bit bus delivering 280.3 GB/s. The newer card's memory runs at 17.5 Gbps effective versus 14 Gbps effective on the older card, but the narrower bus still leaves it with significantly less bandwidth. This is likely a key factor in the RX 5700's OpenCL dominance, where memory bandwidth is heavily utilized.

The feature set also differs. The RX 5700 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 6650 XT supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), reflecting the newer card's support for ray tracing and other advanced features. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 6650 XT also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface versus the RX 5700's PCIe 4.0 x16, a difference that may matter in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios. Power consumption is nearly identical (176 W for the RX 6650 XT versus 180 W for the RX 5700), and both use a dual-slot cooler, though the RX 5700 requires both a 6-pin and an 8-pin connector while the RX 6650 XT uses a single 8-pin.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6650 XT is the clear winner for most gaming and general graphics workloads. Its 16.6% lead in PassMark G3D, a common measure of overall gaming performance, is the headline number. It also wins in modern API tests: 21.1% in Vulkan and 12.1% in Metal. For users running DirectX 11 games, the 40.2% lead in PassMark DirectX 11 is substantial and suggests that the RDNA 2.0 architecture handles legacy APIs much more efficiently. The 20.2% win in DirectX 10 reinforces this. Even in DirectX 12, where the RX 5700 nearly ties in 3DMark Steel Nomad, the RX 6650 XT still wins in PassMark DirectX 12 by 12.9%. The 13.5% lead in GPU compute and 4.5% lead in 2D graphics round out its dominance.

The RX 5700's wins are narrower in practical terms. Its 588.4% OpenCL lead is enormous, but OpenCL is a niche workload in gaming. Its 0.2% 3DMark Steel Nomad win is effectively a tie. However, for users who rely on OpenCL for specific compute tasks, the RX 5700 is the only choice between these two. Its wider 256-bit memory bus provides 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, which is likely the reason for this exceptional OpenCL performance. The RX 5700 also has more shading units and TMUs, which may help in certain compute-heavy scenarios that do not rely on clock speed alone.

For gaming, the RX 6650 XT is universally better across the recorded data. For compute workloads, the RX 5700 has a specific, massive advantage in OpenCL but loses in the PassMark GPU Compute test by 13.5%. This suggests that the RX 5700's OpenCL advantage is domain-specific and does not translate to all compute APIs.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The RX 5700 has a higher average benchmark score of 22,170, while the RX 6650 XT averages 19,765. The RX 5700 also sits in the 67th percentile of all GPUs, versus the 65th percentile for the RX 6650 XT.

Q: Why does the RX 5700 win the OpenCL test by such a large margin?

A: The RX 5700 scores 69,603 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 10,111 for the RX 6650 XT, a 588.4% lead. This is likely tied to its 256-bit memory bus offering 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the RX 6650 XT's 128-bit bus at 280.3 GB/s.

Q: Does the RX 6650 XT support ray tracing?

A: Yes. The RX 6650 XT has 32 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The RX 5700 has no ray tracing cores and supports only DirectX 12 (12_1).

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The RX 6650 XT has a base clock of 2,055 MHz, a game clock of 2,410 MHz, and a boost clock of 2,635 MHz. The RX 5700 runs at 1,465 MHz base, 1,625 MHz game, and 1,725 MHz boost.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The RX 5700 has 2,304 shading units, while the RX 6650 XT has 2,048. The RX 6650 XT compensates with higher clock speeds and achieves higher overall performance in most tests.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 5700 has 448.0 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256-bit bus, while the RX 6650 XT has 280.3 GB/s on a 128-bit bus. Both have 8 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 5700 | AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT |

|---------------|---------------------|----------------------|

| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | RDNA 2.0 |

| Chip | Navi 10 | Navi 23 |

| Generation | Navi (RX 5000) | Navi II (RX 6000) |

| Transistors | 10,300 million | 11,060 million |

| Die Size | 251 mm² | 237 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 41.0M / mm² | 46.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1,465 MHz | 2,055 MHz |

| Game Clock | 1,625 MHz | 2,410 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1,725 MHz | 2,635 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 14 Gbps effective | 17.5 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 280.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2,304 | 2,048 |

| TMUs | 144 | 128 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | None | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 110.4 GPixel/s | 168.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 248.4 GTexel/s | 337.3 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 7.949 TFLOPS | 10.79 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 15.90 TFLOPS (2:1) | 21.59 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 180 W | 176 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | 1x 8-pin |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| HDMI Version | 2.0b | 2.1 |

| Release Date | 2019-07-06 | 2022-05-09 |

| Launch MSRP | 349 USD | 399 USD |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the superior card for the vast majority of workloads. Its 9 recorded wins out of 11 head-to-head benchmarks include decisive victories in DirectX 11 (40.2% lead), DirectX 10 (20.2% lead), Vulkan (21.1% lead), and overall gaming as measured by PassMark G3D (16.6% lead). It also has a higher texture rate (337.3 GTexel/s versus 248.4 GTexel/s), a higher pixel rate (168.6 GPixel/s versus 110.4 GPixel/s), and significantly higher FP32 throughput (10.79 TFLOPS versus 7.949 TFLOPS). The ray tracing cores and DirectX 12 Ultimate support are additional features that the RX 5700 simply cannot offer.

The RX 5700's case rests on two pillars: its 588.4% OpenCL lead and its 0.2% 3DMark Steel Nomad win. The OpenCL result is spectacular but isolated, and the Steel Nomad result is effectively a tie. Its higher average benchmark score (22,170 versus 19,765) is interesting, but this average is heavily inflated by the OpenCL outlier. The RX 5700 also offers more memory bandwidth (448.0 GB/s versus 280.3 GB/s) and a larger memory bus (256-bit versus 128-bit), which are important for bandwidth-sensitive compute tasks.

For a user prioritizing gaming, modern API support, and ray tracing, the RX 6650 XT is the unambiguous choice. For a user whose primary workload is OpenCL compute, the RX 5700 offers a massive, recordable advantage. The RX 6650 XT also has a shorter physical footprint (dimensions not recorded) and a lower TDP of 176 W versus 180 W, making it slightly more efficient. The RX 5700 was released earlier (July 2019 versus May 2022) and has been succeeded by Navi II, which is the generation the RX 6650 XT belongs to. The verdict is straightforward: take the RX 6650 XT unless the specific OpenCL workload is the deciding factor.