AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the AMD Radeon RX 6650M's average benchmark score compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080's?

A: The RX 6650M has an average benchmark score of 71,768, while the RTX 4080 averages 54,247. Despite the RTX 4080's higher raw specifications, the RX 6650M holds a higher average score in the database.

Q: What is the percentile ranking of each GPU?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M sits in the 91st percentile of all GPUs, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 sits in the 86th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 has a boost clock of 2505 MHz, while the AMD Radeon RX 6650M boosts to 2416 MHz.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M has 8 GB of GDDR6 memory, while the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 has 16 GB of GDDR6X memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RTX 4080 offers 716.8 GB/s of bandwidth, compared to the RX 6650M's 224.0 GB/s.

Q: In the head-to-head benchmarks, which GPU wins and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 wins both recorded head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, it scores 214,739 versus 65,800 (a 69.4% delta). In Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 263,779 versus 77,735 (a 70.5% delta).

Architecture Differences

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture, using the Navi 23 chip manufactured on a 7 nm process at TSMC. This is a mobile-oriented design with 11,060 million transistors packed into a 237 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter. The chip belongs to the Radeon RX 6000 series, specifically the Navi Mobile generation, and its predecessor is Polaris Mobile.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 uses the Ada Lovelace architecture with the AD103 chip, fabricated on a 5 nm process, also at TSMC. This is a substantially larger and denser chip: 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 121.1 million per square millimeter. The RTX 4080 is part of the GeForce 40-series, with the GeForce 30 as its predecessor and GeForce 50 as its successor.

The process node difference alone explains much of the performance gap. The 5 nm node allows NVIDIA to pack more than four times the transistors into a die that is only about 60% larger. The architectural philosophies also diverge: RDNA 2.0 focuses on efficient scaling with 1792 shading units, while Ada Lovelace deploys 9728 shading units.

Ray tracing capabilities differ as well. The RX 6650M has 28 ray tracing cores, while the RTX 4080 carries 76. The NVIDIA card also includes 304 tensor cores, which the AMD card entirely lacks. Tensor cores are specialized for AI workloads and DLSS-style upscaling, giving the RTX 4080 a feature set that the RX 6650M cannot match.

The memory subsystems reflect different design priorities. The RX 6650M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, while the RTX 4080 uses 16 GB of GDDR6X on a 256-bit bus. The bus width doubling plus the faster memory type results in more than three times the bandwidth for the NVIDIA card.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data contains only two tests, both Geekbench compute workloads, and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 wins both decisively.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX 4080 scores 214,739 against the RX 6650M's 65,800. The delta is 69.4% in favor of the NVIDIA card. This is a massive gap, reflecting the RTX 4080's advantage in raw compute throughput: 48.74 TFLOPS FP32 versus 8.659 TFLOPS for the AMD part. OpenCL workloads often scale with shading unit count and memory bandwidth, both of which heavily favor the RTX 4080.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are similar. The RTX 4080 hits 263,779, while the RX 6650M reaches 77,735, a 70.5% delta. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can expose differences in architecture efficiency; here, the Ada Lovelace design with its 9728 shading units and 304 texture mapping units simply overwhelms the RDNA 2.0 chip with 1792 shading units and 112 TMUs.

The overall win count is 2-0 in favor of the RTX 4080. The RX 6650M has no wins in the head-to-head comparison. However, the average benchmark score story is different. The RX 6650M's average of 71,768 across its recorded benchmarks places it above the RTX 4080's average of 54,247. This discrepancy suggests that the RTX 4080's benchmark portfolio includes tests where it performs relatively poorly, or that the RX 6650M's recorded benchmarks are weighted toward tests that suit its architecture.

Looking at the RTX 4080's individual Passmark scores clarifies this. It scores 34,457 in Passmark G3D, 20,671 in GPU Compute, but only 204 in DirectX 10, 314 in DirectX 11, 132 in DirectX 12, and 370 in DirectX 9. These low DirectX scores drag down its average. The RX 6650M, with only Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan results recorded, benefits from tests where it performs well relative to its specifications.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification.

• Process node: RX 6650M at 7 nm, RTX 4080 at 5 nm.
• Transistors: 11,060 million versus 45,900 million.
• Die size: 237 mm² versus 379 mm².
• Transistor density: 46.7M per mm² versus 121.1M per mm².
• Base clock: 2068 MHz versus 2205 MHz.
• Boost clock: 2416 MHz versus 2505 MHz.
• Game clock: 2222 MHz on the RX 6650M; the RTX 4080 has no game clock recorded.
• Memory size: 8 GB versus 16 GB.
• Memory type: GDDR6 versus GDDR6X.
• Memory bus width: 128-bit versus 256-bit.
• Memory bandwidth: 224.0 GB/s versus 716.8 GB/s.
• Memory clock: 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) versus 1400 MHz (22.4 Gbps effective).
• Shading units: 1792 versus 9728.
• Texture mapping units: 112 versus 304.
• Render output units: 64 versus 112.
• Ray tracing cores: 28 versus 76.
• Tensor cores: None versus 304.
• Pixel rate: 154.6 GPixel/s versus 280.6 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 270.6 GTexel/s versus 761.5 GTexel/s.
• FP32 performance: 8.659 TFLOPS versus 48.74 TFLOPS.
• FP16 performance: 17.32 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio) versus 48.74 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).
• TDP: 120 W versus 320 W.
• Slot width: IGP versus Triple-slot.
• Power connectors: None versus 1x 16-pin.
• Suggested PSU: Not listed versus 700 W.
• Bus interface: PCIe 4.0 x8 versus PCIe 4.0 x16.
• Display outputs: Portable Device Dependent versus 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a.
• Dimensions: Not listed versus 310 mm length, 140 mm height, 61 mm width.
• Release date: January 2022 versus September 2022.
• Launch MSRP: The RTX 4080 had a launch MSRP of 1,199 USD; the RX 6650M has no recorded MSRP.

The API support is identical: both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4080 wins decisively in raw compute and every recorded head-to-head benchmark. Its 48.74 TFLOPS FP32 performance is more than five times the RX 6650M's 8.659 TFLOPS. The 716.8 GB/s memory bandwidth enables high-resolution texture streaming and compute workloads that would starve the RX 6650M's 224.0 GB/s connection. The 76 ray tracing cores versus 28 give it a clear advantage in ray-traced games. The 304 tensor cores add AI acceleration capabilities that the AMD card lacks entirely.

The RTX 4080 also wins on memory capacity. 16 GB versus 8 GB matters for modern game assets, creative applications, and AI inference. The GDDR6X memory type and 256-bit bus provide a bandwidth advantage that scales with resolution and detail settings.

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins on efficiency in the database's aggregate metrics. Its average benchmark score of 71,768 exceeds the RTX 4080's 54,247, and its 91st percentile ranking beats the RTX 4080's 86th. This is notable given the RX 6650M's 120 W TDP versus the RTX 4080's 320 W. The AMD card achieves its score at less than half the power draw.

The RX 6650M also wins on physical footprint. It is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with no power connectors, making it suitable for portable devices. The RTX 4080 is a triple-slot card requiring a 16-pin connector, a 700 W suggested PSU, and 310 mm of clearance. These are fundamentally different product categories: one is a mobile chip, the other is a desktop flagship.

For use cases, the split is clear. The RTX 4080 is for desktop gaming at high resolutions, ray tracing workloads, AI inference with tensor cores, and compute-heavy creative tasks. Its 16 GB frame buffer handles large datasets. The RX 6650M is for gaming laptops where power efficiency and compact size matter more than absolute performance. Its RDNA 2.0 architecture delivers respectable compute within a 120 W envelope.

The data suggests that the average benchmark score favors the AMD part because the RTX 4080's Passmark DirectX scores are anomalously low relative to its other results. Users should interpret the RTX 4080's average score with caution: its 34,457 Passmark G3D score and 20,671 GPU Compute score are strong, but the DirectX 9 through 12 scores (132 to 370) are outliers that depress the average. The RX 6650M, lacking those tests in its record, avoids such penalization.

In real-world gaming, the RTX 4080 is the clear choice for maximum performance. In thin-and-light laptops, the RX 6650M is the only option that fits. The benchmark database reflects this: the RTX 4080 wins every direct comparison, while the RX 6650M wins on aggregate efficiency and portability.