AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 and AMD Radeon RX 7650 GRE occupy different corners of the GPU market, and the benchmark data reflects that split. The AMD card wins both head-to-head tests, but the RTX A2000 holds its own in the broader average-score picture. The data shows a 42.4% deficit for the A2000 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, a modern gaming-focused workload, and an 18.5% shortfall in Geekbench OpenCL. However, when averaging all benchmarks, the A2000’s score of 46043 actually edges out the RX 7650 GRE’s 42723, placing it in the 85th percentile versus the AMD card’s 83rd. This inversion—losing the direct tests but winning the aggregate—suggests the A2000 excels in areas not covered by these two specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive result is in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12, where the RX 7650 GRE scores 2336 against the A2000’s 1345. That is a 42.4% gap, a massive margin that indicates a fundamental difference in raw graphics throughput. The AMD card’s higher pixel rate of 172.5 GPixel/s compared to 57.60 GPixel/s and its texture rate of 345.0 GTexel/s versus 124.8 GTexel/s explain this dominance in a DirectX 12 rasterization test. The A2000 cannot close that gap; it simply lacks the fill rate and shader throughput needed to compete in this scenario.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 7650 GRE again takes the win, scoring 83109 versus 67695, a smaller but still significant 18.5% advantage. This test is more compute-oriented, and the AMD card’s FP32 performance of 22.08 TFLOPS dwarfs the A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS. The A2000 does not have a Geekbench Vulkan result listed for comparison, but its OpenCL score of 67695 is close to its Vulkan score of 69089, suggesting consistent compute behavior across APIs. The RX 7650 GRE wins both tests, but the margin is much narrower in compute than in gaming, which hints that the A2000’s architecture is more efficient per unit of raw throughput.

Looking at the nearest rivals provides context for each card’s standing. The A2000’s average score of 46043 puts it just 0.2% ahead of the NVIDIA RTX 5880 Ada Generation (45972) and 1% ahead of the Intel Arc A730M (45592). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 5600M by 1.2% and the Intel Arc A530M by 1.2%. The RX 7650 GRE, with an average of 42723, sits 1.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 SUPER (43223) and 1.2% behind the NVIDIA Quadro M6000 24 GB (43262). Both cards are clustered with mid-range competitors, but the A2000’s higher average score and percentile rank show it is the stronger all-around performer despite losing the head-to-head tests.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is stark. The RTX A2000 uses the GA106 chip on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture, built on an 8 nm process at Samsung. The RX 7650 GRE uses the Navi 33 chip on AMD’s RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. The process node difference—8 nm versus 6 nm—gives AMD a density advantage: 65.2M transistors per mm² versus 43.5M, despite the A2000 having a larger die at 276 mm² compared to 204 mm². The A2000 packs 12,000 million transistors, while the RX 7650 GRE has 13,300 million.

Core counts tell a contradictory story. The A2000 has 3328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The NVIDIA card has more shader cores but fewer texture and pixel units. The A2000 also features 26 RT cores and 104 tensor cores, leveraging NVIDIA’s dedicated hardware for ray tracing and AI workloads. The RX 7650 GRE has 32 RT cores but no tensor cores, relying on AMD’s different approach to compute acceleration. The A2000’s FP32 and FP16 performance are both 7.987 TFLOPS, while the RX 7650 GRE achieves 22.08 TFLOPS in both, showing a 1:1 ratio on the AMD side as well.

Memory configurations are similar in bandwidth but different in capacity and bus width. Both cards use GDDR6 with 288.0 GB/s bandwidth, but the A2000 has 6 GB on a 192-bit bus, while the RX 7650 GRE has 8 GB on a 128-bit bus. The A2000’s memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the RX 7650 GRE runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The higher clock speed on the AMD card compensates for the narrower bus, achieving identical bandwidth. The A2000’s base clock is just 562 MHz with a boost of 1200 MHz, while the RX 7650 GRE starts at 1720 MHz and boosts to 2695 MHz, with a game clock of 2350 MHz.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw compute performance?

A: The RX 7650 GRE is far ahead, with 22.08 TFLOPS FP32 versus the A2000’s 7.987 TFLOPS, a nearly 3x advantage that directly explains its wins in Geekbench OpenCL.

Q: Do both cards support the same modern APIs?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, so there is no difference in API compatibility for modern games or applications.

Q: How does memory bandwidth compare between the two?

A: They are identical at 288.0 GB/s, but the A2000 uses a wider 192-bit bus with 6 GB, while the RX 7650 GRE uses a narrower 128-bit bus with 8 GB and faster memory clocks.

Q: Which card has better ray tracing hardware?

A: The RX 7650 GRE has more RT cores at 32 versus the A2000’s 26, but the A2000 also includes 104 tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks entirely.

Q: What is the power draw difference?

A: The A2000 has a 70 W TDP with no power connectors and a suggested 250 W PSU, while the RX 7650 GRE has a 170 W TDP with a single 8-pin connector and a suggested 450 W PSU.

Q: Which card is larger physically?

A: The RX 7650 GRE is longer and taller at 204 mm by 115 mm, compared to the A2000’s 167 mm by 69 mm, though both are dual-slot cards.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category. The process node is 8 nm for the A2000 versus 6 nm for the RX 7650 GRE, with different foundries (Samsung versus TSMC). Transistor count is 12,000 million versus 13,300 million, and die size is 276 mm² versus 204 mm², resulting in densities of 43.5M/mm² and 65.2M/mm² respectively. Clock speeds are dramatically different: the A2000 runs at 562 MHz base and 1200 MHz boost, while the RX 7650 GRE runs at 1720 MHz base, 2350 MHz game, and 2695 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1500 MHz (12 Gbps) versus 2250 MHz (18 Gbps). The A2000 has 3328 shading units, 104 TMUs, and 48 ROPs, while the RX 7650 GRE has 2048 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. RT cores are 26 versus 32, and the A2000 has 104 tensor cores while the RX 7650 GRE has none. Pixel rate is 57.60 GPixel/s versus 172.5 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 124.8 GTexel/s versus 345.0 GTexel/s. FP32 is 7.987 TFLOPS versus 22.08 TFLOPS. TDP is 70 W versus 170 W. The A2000 has no power connectors, while the RX 7650 GRE requires a single 8-pin. Suggested PSU is 250 W versus 450 W. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 versus PCIe 4.0 x8. Display outputs are 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a versus 1x HDMI 2.1a and 3x DisplayPort 2.1. Memory size is 6 GB versus 8 GB, with bus widths of 192-bit versus 128-bit. The A2000 is 167 mm by 69 mm, while the RX 7650 GRE is 204 mm by 115 mm. Production status is end-of-life versus active, and release dates are 2021-08-09 versus 2025-02-06.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split: the RX 7650 GRE is the faster card in gaming and compute workloads, winning both head-to-head tests by substantial margins. Its 22.08 TFLOPS of FP32 performance and higher pixel and texture rates make it the obvious choice for anyone prioritizing raw speed in modern DirectX 12 games or OpenCL compute tasks. The A2000, however, has a higher average benchmark score of 46043 versus 42723, a higher percentile rank of 85 versus 83, and a lower TDP of 70 W versus 170 W. It also offers tensor cores, which the AMD card lacks, and a wider 192-bit memory bus. The A2000 is end-of-life while the RX 7650 GRE is active, meaning the AMD card has a longer support horizon. The A2000’s nearest rival is the RTX 5880 Ada Generation at a 0.2% delta, while the RX 7650 GRE’s nearest rival is the RTX 4070 SUPER at a -1.2% delta, showing the AMD card is slightly below a higher-tier NVIDIA product in average score.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 7650 GRE wins in any scenario that benefits from high FP32 throughput. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2336 is 42.4% higher than the A2000’s 1345, making it the pick for gaming, especially at higher resolutions or with demanding effects. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 83109 is 18.5% higher, so it also wins in compute-heavy applications that scale with raw shader performance, such as rendering or simulation tasks that use OpenCL. The 8 GB memory capacity is also an advantage for workloads that need more VRAM than the A2000’s 6 GB provides.

The A2000 wins in efficiency and aggregate performance. Its average benchmark score of 46043 is 7.8% higher than the RX 7650 GRE’s 42723, meaning that across a broader set of tests not covered in the head-to-head, it performs better. Its 70 W TDP versus 170 W is a massive efficiency advantage, making it suitable for systems with limited power delivery or cooling—it needs no power connectors and only a 250 W PSU. The 104 tensor cores provide dedicated AI acceleration that the RX 7650 GRE cannot match. The A2000 also has a wider 192-bit memory bus, which can be beneficial in bandwidth-sensitive professional applications, and its 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs differ from the RX 7650 GRE’s HDMI 2.1a and DisplayPort 2.1 combination. For a workstation that prioritizes low power, tensor core acceleration, and consistent average performance, the A2000 is the data-backed choice.