AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT vs Intel Arc A750 Comparison

The Intel Arc A750 and AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT are two end-of-life graphics cards that take fundamentally different approaches to delivering 8 GB of GDDR6 memory. The benchmark data reveals a clear split: the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT wins more individual tests (6 out of 10), but the Intel Arc A750 secures the most decisive victories, including a dominant performance in the modern DirectX 12 3DMark Steel Nomad test. The data suggests that the Arc A750 is the stronger choice for next-generation workloads, while the RX 6650 XT excels in a broader range of legacy and compute-oriented tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Arc A750 is the victor in modern, API-forward scenarios. Its most significant win is in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, where it scores 2612 against the RX 6650 XT's 1859, a commanding 40.5% lead. This indicates that the A750's architecture is better optimized for the latest DirectX 12 rendering paths and heavy geometric loads. The A750 also wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a 5.3% advantage (85631 vs 81306), reinforcing its strength in cross-platform, low-level graphics APIs. Furthermore, it shows a 12.9% lead in the Passmark DirectX 12 test (70 vs 62), solidifying its position in modern graphics workloads.

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT, conversely, is the clear winner in legacy DirectX and general compute tasks. It dominates the Passmark DirectX 11 test with a score of 169, which is 57.4% higher than the A750's 72. It also leads in DirectX 10 (109 vs 65, a 40.4% advantage) and DirectX 9 (215 vs 181, a 15.8% lead). Beyond gaming APIs, the RX 6650 XT is significantly stronger in Passmark's GPU compute (7532 vs 5368, a 28.7% lead) and Passmark G3D (17166 vs 12534, a 27% lead). It also wins the 2D test (918 vs 732, a 20.3% advantage). The data shows a clear dichotomy: the A750 is built for the future, while the RX 6650 XT is more versatile across existing software.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on contrasting architectures and silicon. The Intel Arc A750 uses the DG2-512 chip based on the Xe-HPG architecture, manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC. This is a massive die, measuring 406 mm² and housing 21,700 million transistors, resulting in a transistor density of 53.4M per mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip with the RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a larger 7 nm process. Its die is significantly smaller at 237 mm², with 11,060 million transistors and a lower density of 46.7M per mm².

This physical difference translates into a massive disparity in compute resources. The A750 has 3584 shading units, 224 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 112 render output units (ROPs). It also features 28 ray tracing cores. The RX 6650 XT, by comparison, has fewer of everything: 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, but it has 32 ray tracing cores. The A750's theoretical peak performance is significantly higher, with an FP32 throughput of 17.20 TFLOPS compared to the RX 6650 XT's 10.79 TFLOPS. The A750 also has a wider 256-bit memory bus, providing 512.0 GB/s of bandwidth, while the RX 6650 XT is limited to a 128-bit bus and 280.3 GB/s. The A750's larger die and wider memory interface are clearly aimed at high-throughput, modern workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head data is the Geekbench OpenCL score, where the Intel Arc A750 achieves 98554, dwarfing the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's 10111. This is a staggering 874.7% difference in favor of the A750, indicating a massive advantage in raw, general-purpose compute performance as measured by this test.

In the flagship gaming test, 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, the A750's 2612 score is 40.5% higher than the RX 6650 XT's 1859. This is a substantial margin that suggests a clear generational advantage in DirectX 12. The A750 also edges out the RX 6650 XT in Geekbench Vulkan (85631 vs 81306, a 5.3% lead) and Passmark DirectX 12 (70 vs 62, a 12.9% lead), showing consistency in modern APIs.

The AMD card's victories are equally pronounced. In Passmark DirectX 11, the RX 6650 XT's 169 score is 57.4% higher than the A750's 72. The gap narrows for DirectX 10, where the RX 6650 XT leads by 40.4% (109 vs 65), and DirectX 9, where it leads by 15.8% (215 vs 181). The RX 6650 XT also wins the synthetic Passmark G3D test by 27% (17166 vs 12534) and GPU compute by 28.7% (7532 vs 5368). While the A750 wins the most important modern test, the RX 6650 XT demonstrates far better performance in the aggregate of legacy and compute benchmarks.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has a higher average benchmark score of 20582, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's 19765. This places the A750 in the 66th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 6650 XT sits in the 65th percentile.

Q: What is the performance difference in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test?

A: The Intel Arc A750 scores 2612, which is 40.5% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's score of 1859, making it the clear winner in this modern DirectX 12 benchmark.

Q: Which card has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has a significantly higher memory bandwidth of 512.0 GB/s, thanks to its 256-bit bus, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's 280.3 GB/s over a 128-bit bus.

Q: How do the cards compare in DirectX 11 performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is far superior in DirectX 11, scoring 169 in the Passmark test, which is 57.4% higher than the Intel Arc A750's score of 72.

Q: Which card has a higher FP32 (single-precision) compute performance?

A: The Intel Arc A750 has a higher FP32 performance at 17.20 TFLOPS, compared to the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT's 10.79 TFLOPS.

Q: What is the difference in ray tracing core counts?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has more ray tracing cores with 32, compared to the Intel Arc A750's 28 ray tracing cores.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every core specification. The Intel Arc A750 uses the DG2-512 chip on a 6 nm process, while the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip on a 7 nm process. The A750's die is 406 mm² with 21,700 million transistors, while the RX 6650 XT's die is 237 mm² with 11,060 million transistors. Clock speeds also differ: the A750 has a base clock of 2050 MHz and a boost clock of 2400 MHz, while the RX 6650 XT has a base clock of 2055 MHz, a game clock of 2410 MHz, and a boost clock of 2635 MHz.

The memory subsystems are also distinct. Both have 8 GB of GDDR6, but the A750 uses a 256-bit bus for 512.0 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the RX 6650 XT uses a 128-bit bus for 280.3 GB/s. The A750 has 3584 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 112 ROPs, while the RX 6650 XT has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The A750 has 28 RT cores, and the RX 6650 XT has 32. The theoretical performance figures favor the A750, with an FP32 rate of 17.20 TFLOPS and a texture rate of 537.6 GTexel/s, versus 10.79 TFLOPS and 337.3 GTexel/s for the RX 6650 XT. Power and interface specs also vary: The A750 has a TDP of 225 W with a suggested PSU of 550 W, while the RX 6650 XT has a TDP of 176 W and a suggested PSU of 450 W. The A750 is a PCIe 4.0 x16 card, while the RX 6650 XT is a PCIe 4.0 x8 card. Display outputs differ, with the A750 featuring 3x DisplayPort 2.0 and the RX 6650 XT featuring 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The launch MSRP for the Intel Arc A750 was 289 USD, while the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT launched at 399 USD.

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture for different user priorities. The Intel Arc A750 is the pick for users prioritizing modern, DirectX 12 and Vulkan performance and raw compute throughput. Its 40.5% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad and its staggering 874.7% lead in Geekbench OpenCL show that it is the more capable card for future-proofed gaming and demanding compute tasks. Its higher average benchmark score (20582 vs 19765) further confirms its overall performance ceiling.

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the better choice for users with a library of older DirectX 9, 10, and 11 games, or those who rely on specific compute workloads. Its decisive wins in Passmark DirectX 11 (57.4% ahead) and DirectX 10 (40.4% ahead) demonstrate exceptional compatibility and optimization for legacy software. It also offers superior performance in Passmark G3D and GPU compute, making it a more versatile card for a mixed workload. While it has a lower average score and is in a lower percentile, its consistency across many benchmarks makes it a more reliable all-rounder for current software environments, despite launching at a higher MSRP.