AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE vs Intel Arc Pro A60M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two GPUs into entirely different performance classes. The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE delivers desktop-class throughput with a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2336 and an OpenCL score of 83109, placing it in the 83rd percentile among all GPUs in the database. The Intel Arc Pro A60M, by contrast, has no recorded benchmark scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and sits at the 50th percentile. This means the RX 7650 GRE wins every measurable performance comparison, while the A60M has no database entries to contest those results.

The RX 7650 GRE is positioned for gaming and general compute workloads where raw fill rates and shader throughput matter. Its FP32 compute of 22.08 TFLOPS, texture rate of 345.0 GTexel/s, and pixel rate of 172.5 GPixel/s indicate a card designed to push frames in rasterized and ray-traced titles. The Arc Pro A60M, with FP32 of 5.325 TFLOPS, texture rate of 166.4 GTexel/s, and pixel rate of 83.20 GPixel/s, targets professional mobile workloads where moderate compute with lower power draw is acceptable. The A60M's 95 W TDP versus the RX 7650 GRE's 170 W TDP shows Intel's part is built for integrated mobile use, not sustained high-load gaming.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs use a 6 nm TSMC process, but their underlying designs diverge sharply. The AMD chip, Navi 33, packs 13,300 million transistors onto a 204 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 65.2M per mm². The Intel chip, DG2-256, uses 11,500 million transistors on a larger 269 mm² die, resulting in a lower density of 42.8M per mm². This density gap explains why AMD achieves higher clock speeds: the RX 7650 GRE boosts to 2695 MHz with a base of 1720 MHz, while the A60M boosts to only 1300 MHz with a base of 900 MHz.

Architecturally, AMD employs RDNA 3.0 (codenamed Hotpink Bonefish) within the Navi III generation, while Intel uses Xe-HPG under the Alchemist generation for its Pro-Series Mobile lineup. The RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs, matching the A60M's raw count of 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The critical difference lies in ray tracing: AMD integrates 32 RT cores, while Intel provides only 16. This doubles AMD's ray-tracing hardware, which directly contributes to its higher fill rates. The RX 7650 GRE also sustains FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32 (22.08 TFLOPS), whereas the A60M runs FP16 at a 2:1 ratio (10.65 TFLOPS), indicating AMD's architecture handles mixed-precision workloads more efficiently.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and type, both using 8 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. However, AMD's memory clock runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) delivering 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, while Intel's runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for 256.0 GB/s. The RX 7650 GRE also uses a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, while the A60M uses PCIe 4.0 x16, a trade-off where AMD sacrifices lane count for higher per-lane bandwidth utilization.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two products. The only measurable data comes from the RX 7650 GRE's individual records: 2336 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 and 83109 in Geekbench OpenCL. With no scores for the A60M, every comparison must rely on architectural specifications and the percentile standings.

The RX 7650 GRE's average benchmark score of 42723 places it within 1.2% to 1.3% of several NVIDIA rivals. It trails the GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER by 1.2% (43223 average), the Quadro M6000 24 GB by 1.2% (43262), the RTX 5050 Mobile by 1.3% (43268), and the Quadro M6000 by 1.3% (43301). This near-parity with those cards indicates the RX 7650 GRE delivers competitive performance in its price segment. The A60M, with a 50th percentile ranking and zero average score, sits far below this tier, likely among entry-level or integrated-class parts.

Specific fill-rate differences quantify the gap. The RX 7650 GRE's pixel rate of 172.5 GPixel/s is more than double the A60M's 83.20 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 345.0 GTexel/s likewise doubles the A60M's 166.4 GTexel/s. FP32 compute shows the largest divergence: 22.08 TFLOPS versus 5.325 TFLOPS, a factor of 4.1. These numbers confirm the RX 7650 GRE handles geometrically complex scenes and high-resolution textures with far greater headroom.

Clock speeds reinforce the performance gap. The RX 7650 GRE's boost clock of 2695 MHz exceeds the A60M's 1300 MHz by 1395 MHz, and its base clock of 1720 MHz is nearly double the A60M's 900 MHz. Memory bandwidth also favors AMD by 32.0 GB/s (288.0 versus 256.0), which matters for texture-heavy workloads and frame buffer access.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two products according to the database:

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE | Intel Arc Pro A60M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Xe-HPG |

| Generation | Navi III (RX 7000) | Alchemist (Pro-Series Mobile) |

| Chip | Navi 33 | DG2-256 |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 11,500 million |

| Die size | 204 mm² | 269 mm² |

| Transistor density | 65.2M / mm² | 42.8M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1720 MHz | 900 MHz |

| Boost clock | 2695 MHz | 1300 MHz |

| Game clock | 2350 MHz | None recorded |

| Memory clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) |

| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 256.0 GB/s |

| RT cores | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 172.5 GPixel/s | 83.20 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 345.0 GTexel/s | 166.4 GTexel/s |

| FP32 compute | 22.08 TFLOPS | 5.325 TFLOPS |

| FP16 compute | 22.08 TFLOPS (1:1) | 10.65 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 170 W | 95 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power connectors | 1x 8-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | None |

| Bus interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | Portable Device Dependent |

| Dimensions | 204 mm length, 115 mm height | None recorded |

| Release date | 2025-02-06 | 2023-06-05 |

| Launch MSRP | 279 USD | None |

The RX 7650 GRE is a desktop add-in board with a dual-slot cooler and dedicated power input. The A60M is an integrated graphics processor for mobile devices, requiring no power connector and relying on the host system's cooling. AMD's part also supports a game clock of 2350 MHz, a feature absent from Intel's mobile chip, which suggests AMD optimizes for sustained gaming loads.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE delivers 22.08 TFLOPS FP32, while the Intel Arc Pro A60M delivers 5.325 TFLOPS FP32. AMD's part is roughly four times more powerful in single-precision compute.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same graphics APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 according to the database.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare?

A: The RX 7650 GRE offers 288.0 GB/s from GDDR6 at 2250 MHz, while the A60M provides 256.0 GB/s from GDDR6 at 2000 MHz. Both use 8 GB on a 128-bit bus.

Q: What is the ray tracing capability difference?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has 32 RT cores, double the 16 RT cores in the A60M. This gives AMD a significant advantage in ray-traced workloads.

Q: Which GPU requires more power?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has a 170 W TDP and requires a 450 W PSU with a single 8-pin connector. The A60M has a 95 W TDP and needs no external power connector.

Q: How does the RX 7650 GRE compare to its nearest rivals?

A: Its average benchmark score of 42723 sits within 1.2% to 1.3% of the GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER, Quadro M6000 24 GB, RTX 5050 Mobile, and Quadro M6000, showing near-identical performance to those cards.

The Verdict

The data clearly separates these two products by use case. The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE is a desktop GPU for gamers and compute users who need high frame rates and substantial throughput. Its 83rd percentile ranking, 2336 Steel Nomad score, and 83109 OpenCL score demonstrate real-world capability that the A60M cannot match. The 32 RT cores, 22.08 TFLOPS FP32, and 288.0 GB/s bandwidth make it suitable for modern titles with ray tracing and high-resolution textures.

The Intel Arc Pro A60M serves a different purpose entirely. As an integrated mobile processor, it trades performance for power efficiency: 95 W versus 170 W, no external power, and a compact IGP form factor. Its 50th percentile ranking and absent benchmark scores indicate it targets professional mobile workstations where moderate graphics acceleration is sufficient, not gaming or heavy compute. The 16 RT cores and 5.325 TFLOPS FP32 are adequate for basic visualization and CAD work, but the data shows no scenario where it outperforms the RX 7650 GRE.

Builders with a desktop chassis and access to a 450 W PSU should choose the RX 7650 GRE. Its launch MSRP of 279 USD places it in a competitive tier, and its benchmark parity with RTX 4070 SUPER-class hardware confirms strong value in raw performance. Laptop buyers needing an integrated solution with low power draw should consider the A60M, but they must accept a 4x deficit in FP32 compute and half the RT cores. The RX 7650 GRE is the decisive winner in every recorded metric; the A60M justifies its existence only through mobility and power efficiency, which are not benchmarkable in the current database entries.