GPU Comparison

AMD Radeon RX 6650M and NVIDIA CMP 30HX occupy very different corners of the GPU landscape, yet their benchmark scores place them in a comparable performance tier. The data shows the AMD part winning both recorded head-to-head tests, with a decisive margin in Vulkan and a narrow edge in OpenCL. The NVIDIA CMP 30HX, built for a specific mining workload, lacks display outputs and relies on a dated PCIe interface, while the AMD mobile chip is an integrated part of a laptop platform. This comparison highlights how architectural purpose and generation gaps translate into measurable performance differences, despite both cards targeting similar average score territory.

The Radeon RX 6650M achieves an average benchmark score of 71,768, landing in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The CMP 30HX trails with an average of 63,842, placing it in the 89th percentile. That percentile gap is small, but the raw score difference of roughly 12.4% is consistent across the tests. The AMD card's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal at 72,098 (0.5% higher), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 at 72,379 (0.8% higher), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE at 70,829 (1.3% lower). The CMP 30HX sits almost exactly level with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP at 63,830 (0.0% delta) and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M at 63,775 (0.1% higher).

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins in every recorded benchmark category, but the nature of those wins differs significantly. In OpenCL, the margin is razor-thin: the RX 6650M scores 65,800 against the CMP 30HX's 65,199, a delta of just 0.9%. This is effectively a statistical tie, indicating that in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads, both cards deliver nearly identical raw throughput. The CMP 30HX, with its higher memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s compared to the AMD's 224.0 GB/s, manages to close most of the gap in this test, suggesting that memory bandwidth compensates for its lower shader count.

The Vulkan test tells a completely different story. The RX 6650M scores 77,735, while the CMP 30HX manages only 62,484. That is a 24.4% advantage for the AMD part, a substantial gap that points to fundamental architectural efficiency differences. Vulkan's low-level API overhead rewards modern hardware, and the RX 6650M's RDNA 2.0 architecture with 28 dedicated ray accelerators likely contributes to this dominance. The CMP 30HX, based on the older Turing architecture with no ray tracing cores listed, falls far behind when the API demands more from the hardware.

In terms of use cases, the RX 6650M is the clear choice for any workload leveraging Vulkan, including modern game engines and compute APIs that favor newer instruction sets. The CMP 30HX, despite its mining-oriented design, shows respectable OpenCL performance that nearly matches the AMD card, but it has no display outputs, making it unsuitable for any interactive or graphical use case. The AMD card, being an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with portable-device-dependent outputs, at least offers the possibility of display connectivity in a laptop context.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different manufacturing generations and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M uses the Navi 23 chip built on TSMC's 7 nm process, packing 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 46.7 million per mm². The NVIDIA CMP 30HX uses the TU116 chip on TSMC's 12 nm node, with 6,600 million transistors across a larger 284 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 23.2 million per mm². The smaller, denser AMD chip explains why the RX 6650M achieves higher clock speeds: it runs at a 2068 MHz base and 2416 MHz boost, while the CMP 30HX lags at 1530 MHz base and 1785 MHz boost.

Memory configurations differ meaningfully. The RX 6650M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The CMP 30HX has 6 GB of GDDR6 on a wider 192-bit bus, delivering 336.0 GB/s. Despite having 50% more bandwidth, the NVIDIA card cannot translate that into a performance win, indicating that raw bandwidth is not the limiting factor in these benchmarks. The AMD card's higher clock speeds and newer architecture compensate for its narrower memory interface.

Compute resources also favor the AMD part. The RX 6650M has 1792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 render output units. The CMP 30HX has 1408 shading units, 88 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. The AMD card also includes 28 ray tracing cores, while the NVIDIA card lists none. In terms of throughput, the RX 6650M delivers 8.659 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and 17.32 TFLOPS of FP16 (2:1 ratio), compared to 5.027 TFLOPS FP32 and 10.05 TFLOPS FP16 for the CMP 30HX. The pixel rate is 154.6 GPixel/s versus 85.68 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 270.6 GTexel/s versus 157.1 GTexel/s, both roughly 70-80% higher on the AMD card.

Power and physical design diverge sharply. The RX 6650M has a 120 W TDP, is classified as IGP slot width, and requires no power connectors. The CMP 30HX has a 125 W TDP, is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm in length, and requires a single 8-pin power connector with a suggested 300 W power supply. The NVIDIA card uses PCIe 1.0 x4, a severely limited interface, while the AMD part uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The CMP 30HX has no display outputs at all, whereas the RX 6650M's outputs are dependent on the portable device it is integrated into.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL benchmark is the closest contest. The RX 6650M scores 65,800 against the CMP 30HX's 65,199, a delta of only 0.9%. This result makes sense given the CMP 30HX's higher memory bandwidth, which aids memory-bound compute tasks. The margin is within the range of run-to-run variance, so in practice, these two cards are effectively equivalent for OpenCL workloads. The CMP 30HX's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT LP, scores 63,830, just 0.0% away, confirming that the NVIDIA card performs exactly in line with its expected tier in this test.

The Vulkan benchmark reveals the true performance gap. The RX 6650M's 77,735 score dwarfs the CMP 30HX's 62,484, a 24.4% advantage. This is not a marginal difference; it represents a full performance tier separation. The AMD card's Vulkan score is closer to its OpenCL score (77,735 vs 65,800, a 18.1% improvement), while the CMP 30HX actually scores lower in Vulkan than in OpenCL (62,484 vs 65,199, an 4.2% decline). This suggests the NVIDIA card is not well optimized for Vulkan's modern API features, while the AMD card thrives under them.

Across both tests, the RX 6650M wins 2 out of 2 head-to-head benchmarks. The average score difference favors the AMD card by roughly 12.4% (71,768 vs 63,842). The CMP 30HX's best-case scenario is the OpenCL test, where it nearly matches the AMD card, but it cannot sustain that performance in Vulkan. For any user prioritizing consistent performance across multiple APIs, the RX 6650M is clearly superior.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the stronger GPU in every measured benchmark. Its 24.4% lead in Vulkan is decisive, and even in OpenCL, where the NVIDIA card's extra memory bandwidth helps, the AMD part still edges ahead by 0.9%. The RX 6650M's higher clock speeds, 27% more shading units, and 28 ray tracing cores provide a structural advantage that the CMP 30HX cannot overcome despite its wider memory bus.

The CMP 30HX is not without merit in its specific niche. Its OpenCL score of 65,199 is respectable, and its 336.0 GB/s memory bandwidth is genuinely high. But the card has no display outputs, uses a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, and is designed exclusively for mining operations. It lacks the versatility required for general-purpose computing or gaming. Its 89th percentile ranking places it just below the RX 6650M's 91st percentile, and its nearest rivals are all AMD cards in the same score range.

For a user choosing between these two, the decision is clear. The RX 6650M is the only option that supports modern graphics APIs at a high level, offers any possibility of display output (portable-device-dependent), and delivers superior performance across the board. The CMP 30HX's only advantage is its 12% higher memory bandwidth, which fails to translate into benchmark wins. The AMD card's launch was in January 2022, while the NVIDIA card arrived in February 2021, nearly a year earlier, and its older Turing architecture shows its age in the Vulkan test.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better overall benchmark performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M has an average benchmark score of 71,768 compared to the NVIDIA CMP 30HX's 63,842, a difference of roughly 12.4%. The AMD card wins both recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The RX 6650M scores 77,735 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the CMP 30HX scores 62,484, a 24.4% advantage for the AMD card. This is the largest single-test margin between the two.

Q: Does the CMP 30HX have any advantage in compute workloads?

A: In OpenCL, the CMP 30HX nearly matches the RX 6650M, scoring 65,199 versus 65,800, a delta of just 0.9%. Its higher memory bandwidth of 336.0 GB/s likely helps close the gap in memory-bound tasks.

Q: Why does the CMP 30HX have higher memory bandwidth?

A: The CMP 30HX uses a 192-bit memory bus with 6 GB of GDDR6, delivering 336.0 GB/s. The RX 6650M has a 128-bit bus with 8 GB of GDDR6, delivering 224.0 GB/s.

Q: What are the architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The RX 6650M uses RDNA 2.0 on a 7 nm process with 11,060 million transistors, while the CMP 30HX uses Turing on a 12 nm process with 6,600 million transistors. The AMD card has 1792 shading units and 28 ray tracing cores; the NVIDIA card has 1408 shading units and no ray tracing cores.

Q: Is the CMP 30HX suitable for gaming or display use?

A: No. The CMP 30HX has no display outputs and is classified as a mining GPU. The RX 6650M, while an IGP, has portable-device-dependent display outputs, making it the only viable option for any graphical output.