AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs NVIDIA CMP 50HX Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split is decisive. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins both recorded tests, taking the Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan workloads outright. Its advantage is not marginal in either case. In OpenCL, the AMD part scores 65,800 against 56,135 for the NVIDIA CMP 50HX, a 17.2% lead. In Vulkan, the gap widens dramatically: 77,735 versus 47,445, a 63.8% advantage. The database records zero wins for the NVIDIA CMP 50HX across the head-to-head suite.

The use-case picture follows from those results. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M is positioned for graphics-oriented workloads, particularly those leveraging modern API paths. Its Vulkan performance is exceptional relative to the CMP 50HX, making it the stronger choice for any application that can use Vulkan directly, such as newer game engines or compute frameworks built on that API. OpenCL performance, while still favorable to AMD, is closer, suggesting that legacy compute workloads narrow the gap somewhat.

The NVIDIA CMP 50HX, with its no-display-output design, has no use case in conventional rendering on a desktop monitor. It is a mining-focused card. The recorded data shows it trails in both compute APIs, so its intended niche, cryptocurrency mining, does not translate into benchmark wins here. Its only advantage is qualitative: it trades away display functionality entirely, which frees the card for dedicated compute tasks in a rig where video output is handled elsewhere. But based strictly on the numbers, the AMD GPU wins every measured scenario.

For users prioritizing raw throughput in modern graphics APIs, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the clear pick. For environments where Vulkan is the primary interface, its 63.8% lead is decisive. Even in OpenCL, where NVIDIA traditionally has a strong foothold, the AMD part holds a comfortable 17.2% margin. The CMP 50HX has no benchmark category where it leads.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural lineages. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M uses RDNA 2.0 on the Navi 23 chip, built on a 7 nm TSMC process. The NVIDIA CMP 50HX uses Turing on the TU102 chip, built on a 12 nm TSMC process. That process gap matters: AMD packs 11,060 million transistors into a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per mm². NVIDIA fits 18,600 million transistors into a much larger 754 mm² die, with a density of 24.7 million per mm². The AMD chip is nearly twice as dense, a direct consequence of the smaller process node.

Core counts differ substantially. The RX 6650M has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster output units. The CMP 50HX has 3,584 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 80 ROPs. NVIDIA's raw shader count is double AMD's, but the architectural efficiency differs. For ray tracing, the AMD card has 28 RT cores, while the NVIDIA card has 56 RT cores. The NVIDIA card also includes 448 tensor cores, a feature entirely absent from the AMD part. Those tensor cores are typically used for AI workloads, but the benchmark suite here does not test them.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The AMD card uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The NVIDIA card uses 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus, yielding 560.0 GB/s, which is 2.5 times the bandwidth. Clock speeds tell the opposite story: the AMD base clock is 2068 MHz with a boost of 2416 MHz and a game clock of 2222 MHz. The NVIDIA base is 1350 MHz with a boost of 1545 MHz. The AMD card runs at significantly higher frequencies, which helps compensate for its narrower memory bus and lower core count in some workloads.

Power and physical design differ fundamentally. The AMD card draws 120 W and is listed as an integrated graphics package with no power connectors and no slot width. The NVIDIA card draws 250 W, requires dual 8-pin power connectors, a 600 W suggested PSU, and occupies a dual-slot footprint measuring 267 mm by 116 mm by 35 mm. The AMD card has display outputs noted as portable device dependent, while the NVIDIA card has no outputs at all. The CMP 50HX also uses a PCIe 1.0 x4 interface, a severe limitation compared to the AMD card's PCIe 4.0 x8.

Both cards support the same API level: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. That parity means the massive Vulkan performance gap is not due to API feature support but to architectural execution efficiency.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the AMD Radeon RX 6650M at 65,800 versus the NVIDIA CMP 50HX at 56,135. The delta is 17.2% in AMD's favor. This is a moderate victory. The OpenCL workload tends to stress raw compute throughput, memory bandwidth, and driver efficiency. NVIDIA's higher core count and 2.5x memory bandwidth do not translate into a win here. Instead, AMD's higher clocks and denser process node carry the day. The RX 6650M's boost clock of 2416 MHz versus 1545 MHz on the CMP 50HX is a 56% clock advantage, which apparently offsets the NVIDIA hardware's resource advantages.

The Geekbench Vulkan test is where the gap becomes enormous. AMD scores 77,735, NVIDIA scores 47,445. The delta is 63.8%. This is not a close race; it is a rout. Vulkan is a low-level API that rewards efficient command submission, shader compilation, and draw-call handling. The RDNA 2.0 architecture appears to handle these workloads far more effectively than Turing does. The fact that both cards support Vulkan 1.4 makes the result purely a matter of implementation quality. AMD's 28 RT cores and 1,792 shading units outperform NVIDIA's 56 RT cores and 3,584 shading units by a wide margin in this test, suggesting that raw resource counts are not the primary driver of Vulkan performance.

Across both tests, the AMD card's average benchmark score is 71,768, placing it in the 91st percentile of all GPUs. The NVIDIA card's average is 51,790, placing it in the 86th percentile. The AMD card sits 38.5% higher in average score. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal (avg 72,098, delta -0.5%), the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 (avg 72,379, delta -0.8%), and the AMD Radeon RX 6600 LE (avg 70,829, delta +1.3%). The CMP 50HX's nearest rivals are the AMD Radeon RX 6900 XT (avg 50,951, delta +1.6%), the AMD Radeon RX Vega 64 (avg 50,001, delta +3.6%), and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti (avg 49,957, delta +3.7%). Notably, the CMP 50HX's average score sits above those three rivals, but they are all much lower-tier cards in the database's performance hierarchy.

The pattern is clear: the AMD card is a high-performing mobile GPU that punches well above its power class in synthetic benchmarks, while the NVIDIA card is a mining derivative that, despite its substantial hardware, does not deliver competitive compute results in these tests.

FAQ

Q: Which card wins the OpenCL benchmark, and by how much?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins, scoring 65,800 against 56,135 for the NVIDIA CMP 50HX, a 17.2% advantage.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two cards?

A: The largest gap is in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the AMD card scores 77,735 versus 47,445 for the NVIDIA card, a 63.8% lead.

Q: Does the NVIDIA CMP 50HX have any display outputs?

A: No. The CMP 50HX is listed as having no outputs, while the AMD Radeon RX 6650M has display outputs that are portable device dependent.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The NVIDIA card has 560.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 10 GB of GDDR6 on a 320-bit bus. The AMD card has 224.0 GB/s from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M boosts to 2416 MHz, while the NVIDIA CMP 50HX boosts to 1545 MHz.

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

A: The AMD card averages 71,768, placing it in the 91st percentile. The NVIDIA card averages 51,790, placing it in the 86th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Radeon RX 6650M | NVIDIA CMP 50HX |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Turing |

| Chip | Navi 23 | TU102 |

| Process node | 7 nm | 12 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Transistors | 11,060 million | 18,600 million |

| Die size | 237 mm² | 754 mm² |

| Transistor density | 46.7M / mm² | 24.7M / mm² |

| Base clock | 2068 MHz | 1350 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2416 MHz | 1545 MHz |

| Game clock | 2222 MHz | None |

| Memory size | 8 GB | 10 GB |

| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 320 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 560.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 1792 | 3584 |

| Texture mapping units | 112 | 192 |

| Raster output units | 64 | 80 |

| Ray tracing cores | 28 | 56 |

| Tensor cores | None | 448 |

| Pixel rate | 154.6 GPixel/s | 123.6 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 270.6 GTexel/s | 296.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 8.659 TFLOPS | 11.07 TFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1) | 22.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 120 W | 250 W |

| Slot width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | None | 600 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 1.0 x4 |

| Display outputs | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |

| Dimensions | Not listed | 267 mm x 116 mm x 35 mm |

| Release date | 2022-01-03 | 2021-06-23 |

| Production status | End-of-life | End-of-life |

| Generation | Navi Mobile (RX 6000M) | Mining GPUs |