AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT vs NVIDIA T400 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT and NVIDIA T400 occupy different corners of the GPU market, and the recorded benchmark data reflects that divide clearly. The database shows one decisive victory for each card across the two shared tests, with the AMD part dominating in Vulkan compute while the NVIDIA part takes OpenCL. These results, combined with the architectural and specification gaps, make the choice between them straightforward for most use cases.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two cards were tested in exactly two shared workloads, and the outcomes could hardly be more lopsided in opposite directions. In Geekbench Vulkan, the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT scored 81,306 points against the NVIDIA T400’s 15,976 points. That is a 408.9% advantage for the AMD card, meaning it delivers more than five times the Vulkan performance of the T400. The magnitude of this gap is consistent with the fundamental differences in compute resources, memory bandwidth, and clock speeds between the two products.

In Geekbench OpenCL, however, the result flips. The NVIDIA T400 scored 17,039 points while the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT scored 10,111 points. The delta shows the T400 leading by 40.7% in this test. This is a surprising outcome given the AMD card’s far larger hardware specifications, but the data is unambiguous. The T400’s OpenCL score appears to benefit from its driver stack or workload characteristics that favor its architecture. The AMD card’s OpenCL result is notably weaker than its Vulkan result relative to the T400, suggesting that the RDNA 2.0 implementation is less optimized for OpenCL in this benchmark.

Looking at the broader benchmark database, the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has an average benchmark score of 19,765 across all recorded tests. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD FirePro W7000 at 19,905 (0.7% higher), the NVIDIA Tesla K40m at 19,885 (0.6% higher), and the NVIDIA Quadro K5200 at 19,602 (0.8% lower). The RX 6650 XT sits essentially in a tie with these older professional cards, with deltas under 1% in either direction. Its percentile ranking against all GPUs is 65, meaning it outperforms two-thirds of the database entries.

The NVIDIA T400’s average benchmark score is 16,508. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090 D V2 at 16,504 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon PRO W7500 at 16,415 (0.6% lower), and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell at 16,408 (0.6% lower). The T400 also sits within a narrow band of scores, with all deltas under 1%. Its percentile ranking is 60, which is five points lower than the RX 6650 XT. The average score difference between the two cards is 3,257 points, or roughly 19.7% in favor of the AMD part.

Within the AMD card’s own benchmark suite, the strongest results come from Geekbench Metal at 97,969 points and Geekbench Vulkan at 81,306 points. The Passmark G3D score of 17,166 and the Passmark GPU Compute score of 7,532 further confirm its general compute strength. The T400 has no recorded Metal or Passmark results in the database, so its profile relies entirely on the two Geekbench tests.

The head-to-head data shows that the Vulkan test is the more representative measure of raw performance potential for the AMD card, while the OpenCL test highlights a specific weakness. For any workload that uses Vulkan, the RX 6650 XT is in a different performance class entirely. For OpenCL compute, the T400 holds a clear edge despite its smaller hardware footprint.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split decision. For users who prioritize Vulkan-based workloads, gaming, or any application that leverages modern graphics APIs, the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the only rational choice. Its 408.9% lead in Geekbench Vulkan is not a marginal advantage; it represents a fundamental performance tier difference. The card also carries an 8 GB GDDR6 memory pool on a 128-bit bus with 280.3 GB/s bandwidth, which is essential for texture-heavy or compute-heavy scenes. The T400’s 2 GB memory and 80.00 GB/s bandwidth would bottleneck such workloads regardless of driver optimizations.

For users whose primary workload is OpenCL compute, the NVIDIA T400’s 40.7% lead in that specific test is notable. The T400 achieves this with a 30 W TDP, no power connectors, and a single-slot design, making it suitable for low-power or space-constrained systems. The database shows that the T400’s OpenCL score of 17,039 is its stronger result, nearly matching the RX 6650 XT’s average benchmark score of 19,765 despite the latter’s much larger silicon. However, this singular strength does not translate to general-purpose performance. The T400’s average score of 16,508 is 16.5% lower than the RX 6650 XT’s average of 19,765, and its percentile ranking of 60 trails the AMD card’s 65.

The launch MSRP for the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT was 399 USD. The T400 has no recorded launch MSRP in the database. Beyond pricing, the specification sheet tells the story: the RX 6650 XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores, while the T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs with no ray tracing support. The AMD card’s FP32 throughput is 10.79 TFLOPS versus the T400’s 1,094.4 GFLOPS, a nearly tenfold difference. The pixel rate is 168.6 GPixel/s versus 22.80 GPixel/s, and the texture rate is 337.3 GTexel/s versus 34.20 GTexel/s.

The verdict is that the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT is the superior general-purpose GPU by a wide margin, with the sole exception of OpenCL performance where the T400 wins. Users who need OpenCL compute in a low-power, single-slot form factor should consider the T400. Everyone else, particularly those running Vulkan applications or any modern 3D workload, should choose the RX 6650 XT.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes. The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. The NVIDIA T400 uses the TU117 chip built on Turing architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process, also at TSMC. The process node difference is significant: 7 nm versus 12 nm means the AMD chip packs transistors more densely and operates more efficiently per square millimeter.

The RX 6650 XT has 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The T400 has 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, with a density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The AMD chip crams more than twice the transistor density into a slightly larger die, which explains its massive performance advantage in most workloads.

The AMD card’s RDNA 2.0 architecture includes 32 ray tracing cores, a feature the Turing-based T400 lacks entirely. The T400 has no RT cores and no tensor cores, while the RX 6650 XT reports 32 RT cores. The AMD card also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), whereas the T400 only supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card’s Vulkan implementation delivers far higher scores in the database.

Clock speeds differ dramatically. The RX 6650 XT has a base clock of 2055 MHz, a boost clock of 2635 MHz, and a game clock of 2410 MHz. The T400 has a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz, with no game clock listed. The AMD card’s boost clock is 1,210 MHz higher than the T400’s boost, which, combined with the larger core configuration, drives the observed performance gap.

Memory architecture also diverges. The RX 6650 XT uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, running at 2190 MHz with 17.5 Gbps effective speed, delivering 280.3 GB/s bandwidth. The T400 uses 2 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, running at 1250 MHz with 10 Gbps effective speed, delivering 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The AMD card has four times the memory capacity and more than three times the bandwidth.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every recorded specification. The RX 6650 XT has 2,048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, while the T400 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The AMD card’s FP32 output is 10.79 TFLOPS, and its FP16 output is 21.59 TFLOPS (2:1). The T400’s FP32 output is 1,094.4 GFLOPS, and its FP16 output is 2.189 TFLOPS (2:1). The AMD card is roughly ten times faster in FP32 and FP16 compute.

Pixel and texture rates follow the same pattern. The RX 6650 XT achieves 168.6 GPixel/s and 337.3 GTexel/s, while the T400 achieves 22.80 GPixel/s and 34.20 GTexel/s. These are direct consequences of the ROP and TMU counts multiplied by clock speeds.

Power requirements differ massively. The RX 6650 XT has a TDP of 176 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, and suggests a 450 W power supply. The T400 has a TDP of 30 W, needs no power connectors, and suggests a 200 W power supply. The AMD card is dual-slot, while the T400 is single-slot. The bus interface also differs: the RX 6650 XT uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the T400 uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Display outputs are distinct. The RX 6650 XT offers 1x HDMI 2.1 and 3x DisplayPort 1.4a. The T400 offers 3x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a. Both are end-of-life products, with the RX 6650 XT released on 2022-05-09 and the T400 on 2021-05-05.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT scores 81,306 in Geekbench Vulkan, which is 408.9% higher than the NVIDIA T400’s 15,976.

Q: Which card wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA T400 leads in Geekbench OpenCL with 17,039 points, a 40.7% advantage over the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT’s 10,111.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has an average benchmark score of 19,765, while the NVIDIA T400 has an average of 16,508.

Q: Does the AMD card support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has 32 ray tracing cores. The NVIDIA T400 has no ray tracing cores listed.

Q: What is the memory capacity difference?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA T400 has 2 GB of GDDR6 memory.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile ranking?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650 XT ranks in the 65th percentile against all GPUs, while the NVIDIA T400 ranks in the 60th percentile.