AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Comparison
AMD Radeon Vega 8
GeForce GTX 650 Ti
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti
The AMD Radeon Vega 8 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti represent two very different approaches to graphics hardware, one a modern integrated solution and the other a dedicated discrete card from a previous era. The database shows the AMD part holds a narrow lead in average benchmark score, 9221 versus 8053, placing it at the 45th percentile compared to the GTX 650 Ti's 42nd. However, the head-to-head results are split, with each card claiming one win in the two recorded tests, making the choice between them dependent on the specific application workload.
The Verdict
For users running compute-oriented workloads that leverage OpenCL, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 is the clear pick. Its score of 8822 in the geekbench_opencl test beats the GTX 650 Ti's 7877 by a significant 12% margin. This advantage likely stems from the newer architecture and its ability to access system memory flexibly, which benefits certain parallel processing tasks.
For users prioritizing Vulkan graphics performance, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti holds a slight edge. Its geekbench_vulkan score of 8229 narrowly surpasses the Vega 8's 8134, a difference of just 1.2%. This margin is small enough that real-world gaming differences would be minimal, but the discrete card's dedicated memory and higher raw throughput might provide more consistent frame pacing in graphics-bound scenarios.
The average benchmark score across all recorded tests also favors the AMD part. With an average of 9221 versus 8053, the Vega 8 sits roughly 12.7% ahead in overall measured performance. The nearest rival data confirms this positioning: the Vega 8 is within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon 890M and 0.6% behind the GTX 960, while the GTX 650 Ti sits between the GTX 880M and GTX 650 Ti Boost. Ultimately, the Vega 8 is the more capable all-rounder, but the GTX 650 Ti remains competitive in Vulkan-specific scenarios.
Architecture Differences
The two GPUs come from entirely different architectural eras. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture on a 14 nm process from GlobalFoundries, featuring the Raven chip. In contrast, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti employs the Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process from TSMC, using the GK106S chip. This process node difference is substantial, with the AMD part packing 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, yielding a density of 23.5M per mm². The NVIDIA chip contains 2,540 million transistors on a slightly larger 221 mm² die, resulting in a much lower density of 11.5M per mm².
The memory subsystem also differs fundamentally. The Vega 8 uses system-shared memory, with its size, type, and bus width all listed as "System Shared" and bandwidth described as "System Dependent". This means its performance is tied to the host system's RAM configuration. The GTX 650 Ti, on the other hand, has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a fixed 86.40 GB/s of bandwidth and running at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective).
Shader resources show a trade-off. The GTX 650 Ti has more shading units (768 versus 512), more texture mapping units (64 versus 32), and more render output units (16 versus 8). This translates to higher theoretical pixel and texture rates: 14.85 GPixel/s and 59.39 GTexel/s for NVIDIA, versus 8.800 GPixel/s and 35.20 GTexel/s for AMD. Despite this, the AMD card's FP32 throughput of 1,126.4 GFLOPS is lower than the NVIDIA card's 1,425.4 GFLOPS, yet the AMD part still wins in OpenCL, suggesting architectural efficiency differences matter more than raw count.
Power and interface specifications diverge sharply. The Vega 8 is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and a motherboard-dependent display output. The GTX 650 Ti is a single-slot discrete card with a 110 W TDP, requiring one 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested power supply, and it uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD Radeon Vega 8 wins in OpenCL compute workloads. The data shows a 12% advantage over the GTX 650 Ti in this test, with scores of 8822 versus 7877. This makes it the better choice for applications that leverage OpenCL for general-purpose GPU computing, such as certain physics simulations, video encoding tasks, or scientific calculations that can use the flexible system memory architecture.
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti wins in Vulkan graphics. Its score of 8229 versus 8134 represents a 1.2% lead, which is modest but consistent with the card's higher texture and pixel rates. For gaming or graphics applications that use the Vulkan API, this card provides slightly better performance, though the margin is narrow enough that other factors like driver optimization could sway real-world results.
The average benchmark score favors AMD overall. The Vega 8's average of 9221 is notably higher than the GTX 650 Ti's 8053, indicating that the integrated part delivers better balanced performance across the recorded tests. This makes it the safer choice for users who want a single solution for mixed workloads without knowing whether they will lean more toward compute or graphics.
FAQ
Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 has an average benchmark score of 9221, which is higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti's 8053, giving AMD a lead of roughly 12.7%.
Q: What is the difference in OpenCL performance?
A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 scores 8822 in geekbench_opencl, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti scores 7877, resulting in a 12% advantage for the AMD card.
Q: Which card performs better in Vulkan tests?
A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti scores 8229 in geekbench_vulkan, narrowly beating the AMD Radeon Vega 8's 8134, a difference of 1.2%.
Q: How do their memory configurations compare?
A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti has 1024 MB of dedicated GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth.
Q: What are the power requirements for each card?
A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 has a 25 W TDP and requires no power connectors, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti has a 110 W TDP and needs one 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested power supply.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The two recorded head-to-head benchmarks tell a clear story of specialization. In the geekbench_opencl test, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 achieves 8822 points, decisively outperforming the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti's 7877 points. This 12% delta is the largest margin in either direction and confirms that AMD's newer architecture, despite having fewer shading units and lower FP32 throughput, handles OpenCL workloads more efficiently. The Vega 8's system-shared memory might be an advantage here, as it can leverage faster system RAM in some configurations, though the database lists bandwidth as system-dependent.
In the geekbench_vulkan test, the tables turn slightly. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti scores 8229, edging out the AMD Radeon Vega 8's 8134 by a 1.2% margin. This is a much tighter result, and the NVIDIA card's dedicated GDDR5 memory with 86.40 GB/s bandwidth likely contributes to its stability in graphics-heavy tasks. The GTX 650 Ti's higher pixel rate of 14.85 GPixel/s and texture rate of 59.39 GTexel/s provide a theoretical foundation for this win, though the practical difference is small.
Looking at the broader benchmark context, the AMD Radeon Vega 8's average of 9221 places it among rivals like the AMD Radeon 890M (9210, 0.1% behind) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9273, 0.6% ahead). The GTX 650 Ti's average of 8053 puts it near the GTX 880M (8040, 0.2% ahead) and the Quadro P5000 (8039, 0.2% ahead). These proximity figures show that both cards perform in a similar class, despite their architectural differences.
Specification Differences
The process node differs significantly: AMD uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries, while NVIDIA uses 28 nm from TSMC. Transistor counts follow this trend, with AMD packing 4,940 million transistors versus NVIDIA's 2,540 million. Die sizes are comparable (210 mm² for AMD, 221 mm² for NVIDIA), but density favors AMD at 23.5M per mm² versus 11.5M per mm².
Memory configurations are fundamentally different. AMD uses system-shared memory with no fixed size, type, or bus width, and bandwidth is system-dependent. NVIDIA has 1024 MB of GDDR5, a 128-bit bus, and 86.40 GB/s bandwidth. The memory clock also differs, with NVIDIA running at 1350 MHz (5.4 Gbps effective) while AMD has no dedicated memory clock.
Core resources vary, with NVIDIA holding more shading units (768 versus 512), TMUs (64 versus 32), and ROPs (16 versus 8). This leads to higher pixel and texture rates for NVIDIA: 14.85 GPixel/s versus 8.800 GPixel/s, and 59.39 GTexel/s versus 35.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance also favors NVIDIA at 1,425.4 GFLOPS versus 1,126.4 GFLOPS.
Power and physical specifications show the integrated versus discrete divide. AMD has a 25 W TDP, no power connectors, and an IGP slot width. NVIDIA has a 110 W TDP, one 6-pin connector, a 300 W suggested PSU, and a single-slot form factor. The bus interface differs as well: AMD uses IGP while NVIDIA uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs are motherboard-dependent for AMD, while NVIDIA offers 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a.
API support shows minor differences. Both support DirectX 12 and OpenGL 4.6, but AMD supports DirectX 12 (12_1) while NVIDIA supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Vulkan support also varies: AMD supports version 1.3, while NVIDIA supports 1.2.175. Finally, the release dates are far apart, with AMD launching on 2018-02-11 and NVIDIA on 2012-10-08, and their production statuses are both end-of-life.