AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs AMD Radeon RX 7600M — the data shows two mobile GPUs from different RDNA generations with surprisingly close real-world benchmark results. The RX 6650M edges ahead in the single available head-to-head test, but the RX 7600M counters with architectural advantages and significantly lower power draw. This analysis walks through the numbers in the FACT PACK to determine which GPU holds up better under scrutiny.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is the Geekbench OpenCL test, where the AMD Radeon RX 6650M scores 65,800 against the RX 7600M’s 63,775. That is a 3.2% delta in favor of the older card. While 3.2% is not a massive margin, it is consistent across the average benchmark scores: the RX 6650M averages 71,768 across its tests (including a 77,735 Vulkan score), while the RX 7600M averages 63,775 from its single OpenCL result.

The RX 6650M also holds a percentile advantage. It sits in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the RX 7600M sits in the 89th. That two-point gap aligns with the head-to-head delta. In the broader context of rivals, the RX 6650M’s 71,768 average places it within 2.2% of the AMD Radeon Vega Frontier Edition (73,370) and within 1.3% of the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (70,829). The RX 7600M’s 63,775 average puts it essentially neck-and-neck with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP (63,830, -0.1%) and the NVIDIA CMP 30HX (63,842, -0.1%).

Interpreting these numbers: the RX 6650M wins the compute race by a small but consistent margin. The Vulkan score of 77,735 for the RX 6650M is notably higher than its OpenCL result, suggesting the RDNA 2.0 architecture responds well to that API. The RX 7600M has no Vulkan score in the data, so cross-API comparison is limited. What the data does show is that despite being a generation newer, the RX 7600M does not outperform its predecessor in raw compute. The delta is 3.2% in favor of the RX 6650M, and the average score gap is 7,993 points, or roughly 12.5% — a more meaningful difference when considering the full benchmark suite.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different RDNA generations. The RX 6650M uses RDNA 2.0 on the Navi 23 chip, fabricated on TSMC’s 7 nm process. The RX 7600M uses RDNA 3.0 on the Navi 33 chip (codenamed Hotpink Bonefish), fabricated on TSMC’s 6 nm process. The node shrink from 7 nm to 6 nm is accompanied by a density increase: the RX 7600M packs 13,300 million transistors into a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The RX 6650M has 11,060 million transistors on a larger 237 mm² die, for a density of 46.7M per mm². That is a 39.6% higher transistor density on the newer part, though the RX 7600M’s die is smaller by 33 mm².

Memory configurations are similar but not identical. Both use 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The RX 7600M runs its memory at 2000 MHz with 16 Gbps effective speed, producing 256.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6650M runs at 1750 MHz with 14 Gbps effective, for 224.0 GB/s. The RX 7600M holds a 32.0 GB/s bandwidth advantage, which is 14.3% higher. Clock speeds tell a different story: the RX 6650M has a higher base clock (2068 MHz vs 1500 MHz) and game clock (2222 MHz vs 2070 MHz), while boost clocks are nearly identical (2416 MHz vs 2410 MHz). The RX 7600M compensates with higher memory clocks.

Compute throughput is where the architectural gap becomes stark. The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, nearly double the RX 6650M’s 8.659 TFLOPS. Similarly, FP16 is 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) on the RX 7600M versus 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1) on the RX 6650M. Shading units, TMUs, ROPs, and ray tracing cores are identical — 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 RT cores on both. Pixel rates are nearly equal (154.6 vs 154.2 GPixel/s), as are texture rates (270.6 vs 269.9 GTexel/s). The FP32 doubling comes from RDNA 3.0’s dual-issue design, not from more hardware.

Power efficiency is a major differentiator. The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W, while the RX 6650M is rated at 120 W. That is a 30 W reduction, or 25% lower power draw, while delivering nearly double the FP32 throughput per watt. The RX 7600M’s FP32-per-watt ratio is roughly 0.192 TFLOPS/W versus 0.072 TFLOPS/W on the RX 6650M. The RX 7600M also uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the RX 6650M is limited to PCIe 4.0 x8. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

The Verdict

The data presents a nuanced picture. The RX 6650M wins the only direct benchmark, with a 3.2% OpenCL lead and a higher average score (71,768 vs 63,775). It also holds a 91st percentile rank versus 89th. For users prioritizing raw compute in the tested workloads, the RX 6650M is the safer choice based on measured results.

However, the RX 7600M is not without arguments. Its 90 W TDP versus 120 W means substantially lower power draw for a mobile part, which often translates to better thermals and battery life in laptops. The FP32 throughput of 17.27 TFLOPS is exactly double the RX 6650M’s 8.659 TFLOPS, indicating that for workloads that leverage RDNA 3.0’s dual-issue FP32, the newer card could pull ahead in scenarios not captured by the OpenCL benchmark. The 256.0 GB/s of memory bandwidth versus 224.0 GB/s is a 14.3% advantage that could benefit texture-heavy or bandwidth-bound tasks.

The RX 7600M is also an active product, while the RX 6650M is end-of-life. The RX 7600M’s release date is 2023-01-03, one year after the RX 6650M’s 2022-01-03. For new designs, the active status and lower TDP make the RX 7600M the more forward-looking option. But strictly on benchmark scores, the RX 6650M wins. The verdict depends on whether the buyer weights measured compute performance (RX 6650M) or architectural efficiency and power draw (RX 7600M).

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 6650M | AMD Radeon RX 7600M |

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

| Chip | Navi 23 | Navi 33 |

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | RDNA 3.0 |

| Generation | Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) | Navi Mobile (RX 7000M) |

| Process Node | 7 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 13,300 million |

| Die Size | 237 mm² | 204 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 46.7M / mm² | 65.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 2068 MHz | 1500 MHz |

| Game Clock | 2222 MHz | 2070 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2416 MHz | 2410 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1750 MHz (14 Gbps) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| FP32 | 8.659 TFLOPS | 17.27 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 34.55 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 120 W | 90 W |

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

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2023-01-03 |

The two GPUs share identical shading units (1,792), TMUs (112), ROPs (64), RT cores (28), memory size (8 GB), memory type (GDDR6), bus width (128 bit), slot width (IGP), power connectors (None), and API support (DirectX 12 Ultimate, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M scores 65,800 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the RX 7600M scores 63,775. The RX 6650M also has a higher average benchmark score of 71,768 versus 63,775.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The RX 7600M has a TDP of 90 W, while the RX 6650M is rated at 120 W. The RX 7600M consumes 25% less power.

Q: Are the memory configurations different?

A: Both have 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, but the RX 7600M has higher bandwidth at 256.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s for the RX 6650M. The memory clock is 2000 MHz (16 Gbps) on the RX 7600M versus 1750 MHz (14 Gbps) on the RX 6650M.

Q: How do the FP32 performance numbers compare?

A: The RX 7600M delivers 17.27 TFLOPS of FP32, exactly double the RX 6650M’s 8.659 TFLOPS. FP16 is similarly doubled at 34.55 TFLOPS versus 17.32 TFLOPS (both 2:1).

Q: Which GPU is newer?

A: The RX 7600M was released on 2023-01-03 and is active, while the RX 6650M was released on 2022-01-03 and is end-of-life.

Q: Do they have the same core counts?

A: Yes — both have 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, 64 ROPs, and 28 ray tracing cores. The architectural difference is in the RDNA version (2.0 vs 3.0) and process node (7 nm vs 6 nm).

Where Each One Wins

AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins on: raw benchmark scores — the 3.2% OpenCL delta and the 7,993-point average score advantage (71,768 vs 63,775). It also wins on percentile ranking (91st vs 89th) and has a higher base clock (2068 MHz vs 1500 MHz) and game clock (2222 MHz vs 2070 MHz). For users who rely on Geekbench OpenCL or Vulkan (where it scores 77,735), the RX 6650M is the proven performer.

AMD Radeon RX 7600M wins on: power efficiency — 90 W TDP versus 120 W is a decisive advantage for thin-and-light laptops. It also wins on FP32 throughput (17.27 TFLOPS vs 8.659 TFLOPS), FP16 (34.55 TFLOPS vs 17.32 TFLOPS), memory bandwidth (256.0 GB/s vs 224.0 GB/s), and PCIe interface (x16 vs x8). The higher transistor density (65.2M / mm² vs 46.7M / mm²) on a smaller die (204 mm² vs 237 mm²) indicates a more modern, efficient design. The RX 7600M is also active production, while the RX 6650M is end-of-life.

The choice is clear-cut for different use cases. If the workload is compute-bound and benchmark-verified, the RX 6650M delivers the higher measured scores. If the workload is power-sensitive, bandwidth-hungry, or can leverage RDNA 3.0’s dual-issue FP32, the RX 7600M offers the better architectural foundation — provided the software can tap into its 17.27 TFLOPS. For mobile users, the 90 W TDP of the RX 7600M is the more practical figure, as it directly impacts cooling and battery life in ways the benchmark data does not fully capture. The RX 6650M’s higher clocks and benchmark wins make it the performance pick; the RX 7600M’s efficiency and bandwidth make it the modern pick.