AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE vs NVIDIA A2 Comparison

The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE and the NVIDIA A2 sit in very different corners of the GPU landscape. The RX 7650 GRE is a desktop gaming card from the Radeon RX 7000 series, built for high frame rates and visual fidelity. The A2 is a low-profile workstation accelerator from NVIDIA’s Ampere generation, designed for dense server environments and specialized compute tasks. The benchmark data reveals a stark performance gap, but the A2 brings capacities the RX 7650 GRE cannot match. This analysis walks through the recorded measurements, architectural differences, and use-case implications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database is Geekbench OpenCL. In this test, the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE scores 83,109 points, while the NVIDIA A2 scores 35,357 points. That is a delta of 135.1% in favor of the AMD card. In practical terms, the RX 7650 GRE delivers more than double the raw compute throughput of the A2 in this OpenCL workload. The RX 7650 GRE wins the sole head-to-head comparison, giving it a 1-0 win record in the database.

To contextualize this score, the RX 7650 GRE’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 42,723. Its nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER, which averages 43,223 points (a delta of -1.2%), and the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB at 43,262 points (-1.2%). The RX 7650 GRE sits just 1.2% behind those cards, meaning its overall performance profile is competitive with a high-end desktop GPU like the RTX 4070 SUPER, despite the massive OpenCL lead over the A2.

The NVIDIA A2, by contrast, has an average benchmark score of 34,690. Its nearest rivals are the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB (34,561 points, delta of 0.4%), the AMD Radeon HD 7970 (34,541 points, 0.4%), and the NVIDIA TITAN V (34,355 points, 1%). The A2 actually edges out those cards by a small margin, but the gap between the A2 and the RX 7650 GRE is enormous. The A2’s Geekbench Vulkan score of 34,023 is even lower than its OpenCL score, reinforcing that this is not a compute powerhouse in general-purpose workloads.

The data shows a clear hierarchy: the RX 7650 GRE outperforms the A2 by a wide margin in raw compute, and it also ranks in the 83rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, while the A2 ranks in the 79th percentile. The percentile difference is modest, but the absolute score difference is decisive.

Architecture Differences

The two cards are built on fundamentally different architectures. The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE uses the Navi 33 chip, based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture, with the codename "Hotpink Bonefish." It is manufactured on a 6 nm process at TSMC, with 13,300 million transistors packed into a 204 mm² die. The transistor density is 65.2 million per square millimeter. This modern, dense process allows for high clock speeds: a base clock of 1720 MHz, a boost clock of 2695 MHz, and a game clock of 2350 MHz. Memory runs at 2250 MHz, providing 18 Gbps effective bandwidth.

The NVIDIA A2 uses the GA107 chip, based on the Ampere architecture, and lacks a codename in the database. It is built on an 8 nm process at Samsung, with 8,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. The A2’s clocks are significantly lower: a base of 1440 MHz and a boost of 1770 MHz. Memory runs at 1563 MHz, or 12.5 Gbps effective. The process node difference is substantial, with the RX 7650 GRE using a more advanced 6 nm node versus the A2’s 8 nm node.

The compute resources differ sharply. The RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, 64 ROPs, and 32 ray tracing cores. The A2 has 1280 shading units, 40 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 10 ray tracing cores, and 40 tensor cores. The RX 7650 GRE has no tensor cores listed, while the A2 includes them, indicating a focus on AI inference tasks for the A2. The pixel rate of the RX 7650 GRE is 172.5 GPixel/s, versus 56.64 GPixel/s for the A2. The texture rate is 345.0 GTexel/s for the AMD card, versus 70.80 GTexel/s for the NVIDIA card. FP32 performance is 22.08 TFLOPS for the RX 7650 GRE, versus 4.531 TFLOPS for the A2. Both cards support FP16 at a 1:1 ratio, with the same figures as their FP32 numbers.

Memory configurations also diverge. The RX 7650 GRE has 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, yielding 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 200.1 GB/s due to lower memory clocks. The A2 has double the capacity but a third less bandwidth. This is a crucial distinction: the RX 7650 GRE prioritizes throughput, while the A2 prioritizes capacity for large datasets.

Power and physical design are opposites. The RX 7650 GRE has a TDP of 170 W, requires a single 8-pin power connector, recommends a 450 W PSU, and is a dual-slot card measuring 204 mm in length and 115 mm in height. The A2 has a TDP of 60 W, requires no power connectors, recommends a 250 W PSU, and is a single-slot card with no listed dimensions. The A2 also has no display outputs, while the RX 7650 GRE offers 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. Both cards use a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface. Both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so API compatibility is identical.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7650 GRE wins decisively in raw compute performance. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 83,109 is 135.1% higher than the A2’s 35,357. In any general-purpose compute task, such as rendering, video processing, or scientific simulation that relies on FP32 throughput, the RX 7650 GRE is the clear choice. Its 22.08 TFLOPS of FP32 performance dwarfs the A2’s 4.531 TFLOPS. The AMD card also wins on memory bandwidth, with 288.0 GB/s versus 200.1 GB/s, which matters for texture-heavy workloads and large data transfers. The RX 7650 GRE’s higher pixel and texture rates (172.5 GPixel/s and 345.0 GTexel/s) make it superior for rasterization and display output, and it has actual display connectors for direct monitor attachment.

The NVIDIA A2 wins in areas not directly measured by the head-to-head benchmark. Its 16 GB of memory is double the RX 7650 GRE’s 8 GB. For workloads that require loading large models or datasets that exceed 8 GB, the A2 is the only option. The A2’s 40 tensor cores provide hardware acceleration for AI inference, a feature entirely absent from the RX 7650 GRE. The A2’s power profile is also a win: a 60 W TDP with no power connectors and a single-slot design allows deployment in space-constrained servers or systems with limited power budgets. The RX 7650 GRE requires 170 W, a power connector, and a 450 W PSU recommendation. The A2’s end-of-life production status, however, means it is a legacy part, while the RX 7650 GRE remains active in production.

The A2’s nearest rivals in the database, such as the NVIDIA T1000 8 GB and the NVIDIA RTX A1000, have similar average scores (34,561 and 34,207 respectively), confirming that the A2 is positioned as a low-power entry-level workstation accelerator. The RX 7650 GRE, by contrast, sits near the RTX 4070 SUPER in average score, placing it in a far higher performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher Geekbench OpenCL score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE scores 83,109, while the NVIDIA A2 scores 35,357. The RX 7650 GRE leads by 135.1%.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has 8 GB of GDDR6, while the NVIDIA A2 has 16 GB of GDDR6. Both use a 128-bit memory bus, but the RX 7650 GRE has higher bandwidth at 288.0 GB/s versus 200.1 GB/s.

Q: Does the NVIDIA A2 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the A2 has 10 ray tracing cores. The RX 7650 GRE has 32 ray tracing cores, but the A2 also includes 40 tensor cores, which the RX 7650 GRE lacks.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has a 170 W TDP, requires one 8-pin power connector, and recommends a 450 W PSU. The A2 has a 60 W TDP, requires no power connectors, and recommends a 250 W PSU.

Q: Can either card be connected to a display?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1 outputs. The NVIDIA A2 has no display outputs, making it a compute-only accelerator.

Q: Which card is newer?

A: The RX 7650 GRE was released on February 6, 2025, and is active in production. The NVIDIA A2 was released on November 9, 2021, and is end-of-life.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous for compute performance: choose the AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE. It delivers 135.1% higher OpenCL performance, has over four times the FP32 throughput (22.08 TFLOPS versus 4.531 TFLOPS), and offers significantly higher memory bandwidth. Its 83rd percentile ranking versus the A2’s 79th percentile reinforces this. For any task that depends on raw shader or compute throughput, gaming, or direct display output, the RX 7650 GRE is the only rational selection.

The NVIDIA A2 is the choice only when specific constraints apply. Its 16 GB memory capacity is essential for workloads that exceed 8 GB, such as large AI models or big in-memory databases. Its 40 tensor cores provide dedicated AI inference acceleration that the RX 7650 GRE cannot offer. The A2’s 60 W power draw, lack of external power connectors, and single-slot form factor make it suitable for passive cooling environments or dense server racks where power and space are at a premium. However, its end-of-life status and far lower compute scores mean it should only be selected for legacy deployments or capacity-bound tasks.

The data shows that these are not competing products; they are complementary tools. The RX 7650 GRE excels at speed, the A2 excels at capacity and efficiency. A user with a standard desktop workload should take the RX 7650 GRE without hesitation. A user with a specific need for 16 GB of memory in a low-power, no-display accelerator should take the A2, despite its older architecture and slower compute.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE | NVIDIA A2 |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 6 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 13,300 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 204 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 65.2M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1720 MHz | 1440 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 2695 MHz | 1770 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) | 1563 MHz (12.5 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 8 GB | 16 GB |

| Memory Bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 200.1 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2048 | 1280 |

| TMUs | 128 | 40 |

| ROPs | 64 | 32 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 32 | 10 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 40 |

| Pixel Rate | 172.5 GPixel/s | 56.64 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 345.0 GTexel/s | 70.80 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 22.08 TFLOPS | 4.531 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 22.08 TFLOPS | 4.531 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 170 W | 60 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

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

| Suggested PSU | 450 W | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 | No outputs |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | February 6, 2025 | November 9, 2021 |

| Launch MSRP | 279 USD | Not listed |