AMD Radeon RX 6650M vs NVIDIA P102-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two benchmark comparisons between the AMD Radeon RX 6650M and the NVIDIA P102-100, and the results are decisive. The AMD part wins both tests outright, with the largest margin appearing in the Geekbench OpenCL workload. There, the RX 6650M scores 65,800 points against the P102-100's 49,602, a lead of 32.7%. That is not a narrow edge; it is a substantial gap that places the AMD mobile chip in a different performance tier for compute-heavy OpenCL tasks.

The second test, Geekbench Vulkan, shows a closer but still clear victory for the RX 6650M. The AMD card records 77,735 points, while the NVIDIA part manages 67,454, resulting in a 15.2% advantage. Notably, the RX 6650M's Vulkan score is its stronger result of the two, and it surpasses the P102-100 by a meaningful margin even though the NVIDIA card is a desktop-class mining GPU with a wider memory bus.

Looking at the broader database context, the RX 6650M's average benchmark score lands at 71,768, placing it in the 91st percentile among all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA TITAN X Pascal at 72,098 (a 0.5% difference) and the AMD Radeon Pro Vega 64 at 72,379 (0.8% higher). The P102-100, by contrast, averages 58,528, which puts it in the 88th percentile. Its closest competitors are the AMD Radeon PRO V710 at 58,657 (0.2% higher) and the AMD Radeon RX 6950 XT at 58,392 (0.2% lower).

The delta between the two cards' average scores is substantial. The RX 6650M outperforms the P102-100 by roughly 22.6% when averaging both benchmark results. In single-test terms, the OpenCL win is the more emphatic, while the Vulkan result reinforces the pattern. The data shows no scenario in the recorded benchmarks where the NVIDIA part takes the lead.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and process nodes, which explains much of the performance gap. The AMD Radeon RX 6650M is built on RDNA 2.0 using TSMC's 7 nm process, with 11,060 million transistors packed into a 237 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 46.7 million per square millimeter, a figure that reflects a modern, tightly integrated design.

The NVIDIA P102-100, by contrast, uses the Pascal architecture on a 16 nm process from the same foundry. It carries 11,800 million transistors across a much larger 471 mm² die, resulting in a density of only 25.1 million per square millimeter. The older process node and larger die size indicate a less efficient design, and the benchmark scores reflect that inefficiency despite the P102-100's higher raw transistor count.

In terms of compute resources, the P102-100 has more shading units (3,200 versus 1,792), more texture mapping units (200 versus 112), and more ROPs (80 versus 64). It also posts higher peak numbers in texture rate (336.6 GTexel/s versus 270.6 GTexel/s) and FP32 throughput (10.77 TFLOPS versus 8.659 TFLOPS). However, the RX 6650M counters with a higher pixel rate at 154.6 GPixel/s compared to 134.6 GPixel/s, and it features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores, which the Pascal chip lacks entirely.

Memory configurations differ sharply. The RX 6650M uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The P102-100 has only 5 GB of GDDR5X but a wider 320-bit bus, delivering 440.3 GB/s. That bandwidth advantage is notable in theory, yet the recorded benchmarks show it does not translate into a win for the NVIDIA part.

The RX 6650M also supports newer APIs, including DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the P102-100 is limited to DirectX 12 (12_1). Both cards support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD part's ray tracing capability and newer feature set give it a functional edge beyond raw compute.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the AMD Radeon RX 6650M is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing benchmark performance. It wins both head-to-head tests, holds a higher average score, and sits in a higher percentile among all GPUs. The P102-100, despite its larger die and higher peak FP32 output, fails to convert those specifications into a competitive result in the two tests measured.

The RX 6650M's 32.7% lead in OpenCL is the single largest margin recorded between these two cards, and its 15.2% advantage in Vulkan confirms that the result is not workload-specific. For users running OpenCL- or Vulkan-based applications, the AMD part is clearly the better performer according to the database.

The P102-100 does have a memory bandwidth advantage (440.3 GB/s versus 224.0 GB/s) and more raw shading units, but the benchmark data shows that these hardware attributes do not produce better scores. The older Pascal architecture and 16 nm process likely hinder efficiency, and the lack of ray tracing cores and newer DirectX feature support further limits its appeal.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every major specification field. The RX 6650M uses a 7 nm process, the P102-100 uses 16 nm. The AMD chip has 11,060 million transistors on a 237 mm² die, while the NVIDIA chip has 11,800 million on a 471 mm² die. Transistor density is 46.7M per mm² for AMD versus 25.1M per mm² for NVIDIA.

Memory is another clear split: 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus for the RX 6650M, versus 5 GB GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus for the P102-100. Bandwidth favors the NVIDIA card at 440.3 GB/s against 224.0 GB/s.

Clock speeds differ as well. The RX 6650M runs at a base of 2068 MHz and boosts to 2416 MHz, with a game clock of 2222 MHz. The P102-100 has a base of 1582 MHz and a boost of 1683 MHz. Memory clocks are 1750 MHz (14 Gbps effective) for AMD and 1376 MHz (11 Gbps effective) for NVIDIA.

Compute unit counts vary: 1,792 shading units, 112 TMUs, and 64 ROPs for AMD; 3,200 shading units, 200 TMUs, and 80 ROPs for NVIDIA. The RX 6650M has 28 ray tracing cores, while the P102-100 has none.

Power draw is significantly different. The RX 6650M is rated at 120 W and uses no power connectors, as it is an integrated mobile part (IGP). The P102-100 draws 250 W and requires two 8-pin connectors, with a suggested PSU of 600 W. The NVIDIA card is dual-slot and measures 267 mm (10.5 inches) in length, while the AMD part has no specified dimensions and is listed as "Portable Device Dependent" for display outputs. The P102-100 has no display outputs at all.

Bus interfaces also differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD versus PCIe 1.0 x4 for NVIDIA. Release dates are January 2022 for the RX 6650M and February 2018 for the P102-100. Both are end-of-life products.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6650M averages 71,768 points across its recorded benchmarks, while the NVIDIA P102-100 averages 58,528 points.

Q: How much faster is the RX 6650M in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The RX 6650M scores 65,800 versus 49,602 for the P102-100, a 32.7% advantage.

Q: Does the NVIDIA P102-100 win any benchmark test?

A: No. The database records two head-to-head tests, and the RX 6650M wins both, with winsA equal to 2 and winsB equal to 0.

Q: What memory configuration does each card use?

A: The RX 6650M has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 224.0 GB/s bandwidth. The P102-100 has 5 GB of GDDR5X on a 320-bit bus with 440.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which card has ray tracing support?

A: Only the AMD Radeon RX 6650M has ray tracing cores (28 of them). The NVIDIA P102-100 has no RT cores listed.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The RX 6650M is rated at 120 W with no power connectors. The P102-100 is rated at 250 W and requires two 8-pin connectors, with a suggested PSU of 600 W.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6650M wins in every measured benchmark category. It is the stronger choice for OpenCL workloads, where its 32.7% lead is the most pronounced, and it also holds a 15.2% edge in Vulkan. For users running compute tasks that rely on these APIs, the data points squarely to the AMD part.

The RX 6650M also wins on efficiency-related metrics. It draws 120 W versus 250 W for the NVIDIA card, and it does so with a smaller die and older process node on the competitor's side. The AMD part's 7 nm process and higher transistor density suggest better power efficiency, though the database does not record direct power consumption measurements.

The NVIDIA P102-100 does have advantages in specific hardware specifications. Its 440.3 GB/s memory bandwidth is nearly double that of the RX 6650M, and its higher shading unit count (3,200 versus 1,792) and FP32 throughput (10.77 TFLOPS versus 8.659 TFLOPS) are notable on paper. However, the recorded benchmark results show that these specifications do not translate into performance wins.

For anyone choosing strictly on benchmark scores, the RX 6650M is the clear pick. For anyone who values memory bandwidth or raw compute unit counts on paper, the P102-100 might appear attractive, but the data does not support a performance advantage. The AMD card's higher percentile ranking (91st versus 88th) and better average score reinforce the same conclusion: the RX 6650M is the more capable GPU in practice, and the P102-100's theoretical strengths do not materialize in the tests recorded here.