AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs Intel Arc Pro A60 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M and Intel Arc Pro A60 are two very different mobile and professional graphics solutions, separated by a generation of design philosophy and target application. Benchmark data from the FACT PACK shows the AMD part winning both head-to-head tests, but the Intel card counters with a larger memory pool and a different physical profile. The data indicates the RX 6650M is the raw performance leader, while the Arc Pro A60 positions itself as a workstation-oriented part with more VRAM and a single-slot form factor.

The Verdict

For pure compute performance, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the clear choice. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks, with a 3.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a commanding 36% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. Its average benchmark score of 71,768 places it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the Intel Arc Pro A60’s average of 60,326 sits in the 88th percentile. The AMD part is also closer to its nearest rivals: it trails the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal by just 0.5% and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 by 0.8%, whereas the Intel card matches the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090 exactly (0% delta) but sits 2.5% behind the AMD Radeon Pro W6600M.

However, the Intel Arc Pro A60 is not without merit. It offers 12 GB of GDDR6 memory versus the AMD’s 8 GB, and its 192-bit bus width delivers 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth compared to the RX 6650M’s 224.0 GB/s. If your workload is memory-capacity bound or requires a single-slot, low-profile installation, the Arc Pro A60 is the only option between the two. It is also an active product, while the RX 6650M is marked end-of-life. The verdict is straightforward: choose the RX 6650M for speed and API performance, choose the Arc Pro A60 for memory capacity, bandwidth, and its active production status.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split is significant. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M uses the Navi 23 chip built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 7 nm TSMC process. It contains 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7M per mm². In contrast, the Intel Arc Pro A60 uses the DG2-256 chip with Xe-HPG architecture, built on a more advanced 6 nm TSMC process. It packs 11,500 million transistors into a larger 269 mm² die, giving a lower transistor density of 42.8M per mm².

Core configurations differ markedly. The RX 6650M has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 ROPs, along with 28 ray tracing cores. The Arc Pro A60 has more shading units (2,048), more TMUs (128), and the same 64 ROPs, but fewer ray tracing cores at 16. Clock speeds heavily favor AMD: the RX 6650M runs at a 2068 MHz base and 2416 MHz boost, while the Intel part starts at a low 900 MHz base and boosts to 2050 MHz. This clock advantage translates directly into pixel and texture rates: the AMD card hits 154.6 GPixel/s and 270.6 GTexel/s, versus 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s for the Intel.

Memory architecture is another divider. The RX 6650M uses a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6 at 14 Gbps effective, delivering 224.0 GB/s. The Arc Pro A60 uses a 192-bit bus with 12 GB of GDDR6 at 16 Gbps effective, nearly doubling bandwidth to 384.0 GB/s. The Intel card also has a PCIe 4.0 x16 interface versus the AMD’s PCIe 4.0 x8, and it offers four DisplayPort 2.0 outputs, while the AMD’s outputs are listed as portable device dependent. Power and physical specs also diverge: the RX 6650M is an IGP with no power connectors and a 120 W TDP, while the Arc Pro A60 is a single-slot card with a 130 W TDP and a suggested 300 W PSU.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two available Geekbench tests tell a clear story, but with very different margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M scores 65,800 against the Intel Arc Pro A60’s 63,485. That is a 3.6% win for AMD, a modest but consistent advantage that suggests the two cards are comparable in general compute workloads. Both cards are also close to their respective rival clusters here: the RX 6650M’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal, averages 72,098 (0.5% higher), while the Arc Pro A60’s closest competitor, the RTX 4090, scores 60,347 (0% delta).

The Geekbench Vulkan result is a blowout. The RX 6650M scores 77,735, while the Arc Pro A60 manages only 57,166. That is a 36% delta in favor of AMD, indicating a massive advantage in Vulkan API performance. This gap is far larger than any other differential in the FACT PACK, suggesting that the AMD architecture handles Vulkan workloads with much greater efficiency than Intel’s Xe-HPG implementation. The RX 6650M’s Vulkan score is also higher than its OpenCL score (77,735 vs. 65,800), while the Intel card’s Vulkan score is lower than its OpenCL score (57,166 vs. 63,485), showing an inverse relationship between the two APIs.

Across both tests, the RX 6650M wins 2 out of 2, with no wins for the Intel part. The average benchmark score reinforces this: 71,768 for AMD versus 60,326 for Intel, a difference of roughly 19%. The percentile ranking also favors AMD, with 91st versus 88th. These numbers indicate that while the Intel card is not far off in OpenCL, its Vulkan performance is a significant liability that drags down its overall standing.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M leads in FP32 throughput at 8.659 TFLOPS versus the Intel Arc Pro A60’s 8.397 TFLOPS, and also has a higher average benchmark score of 71,768 versus 60,326.

Q: Is the Intel Arc Pro A60 better for memory-heavy tasks?

A: Yes. The Arc Pro A60 has 12 GB of GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 384.0 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the RX 6650M’s 8 GB on a 128-bit bus at 224.0 GB/s.

Q: How do they compare in Vulkan performance?

A: The RX 6650M is far ahead, scoring 77,735 in Geekbench Vulkan versus 57,166 for the Arc Pro A60, a 36% advantage in AMD’s favor.

Q: What are their production statuses?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M is end-of-life, while the Intel Arc Pro A60 is marked as active and currently in production.

Q: Which card has more shading units and TMUs?

A: The Intel Arc Pro A60 has more, with 2,048 shading units and 128 TMUs, versus the RX 6650M’s 1,792 shading units and 112 TMUs.

Q: What is the clock speed difference at boost?

A: The RX 6650M boosts to 2416 MHz, while the Arc Pro A60 boosts to 2050 MHz, giving AMD a 366 MHz advantage at peak clocks.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins in every performance metric measured. It takes both head-to-head benchmarks, with the Vulkan win being particularly decisive at 36%. Its pixel rate of 154.6 GPixel/s and texture rate of 270.6 GTexel/s both exceed the Intel card’s 131.2 GPixel/s and 262.4 GTexel/s. It also has a higher FP32 throughput and a better average benchmark score. The RX 6650M is the pick for any workload that prioritizes raw speed, especially Vulkan-based applications, and its 91st percentile ranking confirms its place among high-performing GPUs. Its IGP form factor and 120 W TDP make it suitable for mobile implementations, though it is end-of-life.

The Intel Arc Pro A60 wins where the data shows a structural advantage: memory capacity and bandwidth. With 12 GB versus 8 GB, and 384.0 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s, it is better suited for large datasets or high-resolution textures that exceed the AMD card’s frame buffer. Its single-slot design and 4x DisplayPort 2.0 outputs make it a professional workstation card, and its active production status means it remains available for new systems. The Arc Pro A60 also has a higher shading unit count (2,048 vs. 1,792) and more TMUs (128 vs. 112), which could help in workloads that scale with those resources, despite the lower clock speeds.

In the end, the choice depends on whether you value speed or capacity. The data is unambiguous that the RX 6650M is the faster GPU, but the Arc Pro A60 offers a different set of trade-offs that may be more relevant for specific professional use cases. For gaming or general compute, the AMD card is superior. For memory-bound tasks or multi-display professional setups, the Intel card has the edge where it counts.