AMD Radeon RX 6500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data splits this comparison into two very different eras of mobile graphics. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark, and the margins are not subtle. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6500M scores 38,586 against the GTX 850M's 9,821, a 292.9% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens further: 43,837 versus 8,782, a 399.2% delta. These are not incremental improvements; they represent a generational leap in compute throughput.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M holds no wins in the recorded benchmark set. Its average benchmark score sits at 9,302, placing it in the 46th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 6500M averages 10,362, landing in the 48th percentile. While the percentile gap looks modest, the head-to-head results tell a different story: the RX 6500M's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (avg 10,400, delta -0.4%) and AMD Radeon RX 550X (avg 10,481, delta -1.1%). The GTX 850M, by contrast, competes with the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (avg 9,294, delta 0.1%) and AMD Radeon Vega 8 (avg 9,221, delta 0.9%).

The use-case split is clear. If the workload relies on modern APIs like Vulkan or OpenCL compute, the RX 6500M dominates outright. If the workload is legacy DirectX content, the RX 6500M still leads, but the available data only covers OpenCL and Vulkan for the GTX 850M, so the older card's DirectX performance cannot be directly compared here. What the data shows is that the RX 6500M is built for contemporary rendering pipelines, while the GTX 850M belongs to an era where those pipelines did not yet exist.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is vast, and the numbers in the database make that plain. The RX 6500M uses the Navi 24 chip, built on RDNA 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The GTX 850M uses the GM107 chip, based on Maxwell architecture, also from TSMC but on a 28 nm process. Its 1,870 million transistors occupy a 148 mm² die, for a density of just 12.6 million per square millimeter.

The process node difference alone, 6 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the performance gap. The RX 6500M fits nearly three times the transistors into a smaller area, which directly translates into higher throughput per watt and per square millimeter. The GTX 850M's larger die with fewer transistors reflects a design from 2014, when 28 nm was state of the art.

Feature support diverges sharply. The RX 6500M includes 16 ray tracing cores, a hardware capability the GTX 850M lacks entirely. The RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 850M tops out at DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the underlying hardware capabilities are generations apart. The RX 6500M's RDNA 2.0 architecture also brings FP16 support at a 2:1 ratio (9.830 TFLOPS), whereas the GTX 850M has no recorded FP16 capability at all.

Memory architecture tells a similar story. The RX 6500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 144.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 850M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, delivering just 32.03 GB/s. Despite having half the bus width, the RX 6500M achieves 4.5 times the bandwidth because GDDR6 operates at far higher effective speeds: 18 Gbps versus 2 Gbps.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500M averages 10,362 across all recorded benchmarks, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M averages 9,302. The RX 6500M sits in the 48th percentile of all GPUs, and the GTX 850M sits in the 46th percentile.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the RX 6500M scores 43,837 against the GTX 850M's 8,782. That is a 399.2% advantage for the AMD part, the largest margin in any recorded test.

Q: Does the GTX 850M support ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 850M has no ray tracing cores listed in the database. The RX 6500M includes 16 ray tracing cores as part of its RDNA 2.0 architecture.

Q: What memory types do these GPUs use?

A: The RX 6500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 850M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 32.03 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel fill rate?

A: The RX 6500M achieves 76.80 GPixel/s, compared to the GTX 850M's 14.43 GPixel/s. The AMD part is more than five times faster in this metric.

Q: Are both GPUs still in production?

A: No. Both are listed as end-of-life in the database. The RX 6500M was released on January 3, 2022, and the GTX 850M was released on March 11, 2014.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon RX 6500M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M |

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

| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Maxwell |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 5,400 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 107 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 50.5M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 144.0 GB/s | 32.03 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1,024 | 640 |

| TMUs | 64 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Ray Tracing Cores | 16 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 76.80 GPixel/s | 14.43 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 153.6 GTexel/s | 36.08 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 4.915 TFLOPS | 1,154.6 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1) | None recorded |

| TDP | 50 W | 45 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_0) |

| Release Date | 2022-01-03 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | Polaris Mobile | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | None | GeForce 900M |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only two benchmarks with direct head-to-head data are Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, and both show overwhelming wins for the RX 6500M. In OpenCL, the RX 6500M posts 38,586 against 9,821, a 292.9% delta. This test exercises general-purpose compute, and the gap reflects the massive difference in shading units (1,024 versus 640), texture units (64 versus 40), and raw FP32 throughput (4.915 TFLOPS versus 1,154.6 GFLOPS).

Vulkan tells an even more lopsided story. The RX 6500M scores 43,837, while the GTX 850M manages only 8,782, a 399.2% delta. Vulkan is a modern low-level API, and the GTX 850M's Maxwell architecture was not designed with it in mind. The RX 6500M's RDNA 2.0 architecture, with its Vulkan 1.4 support and contemporary driver pipeline, extracts far more from the same API. This is not just a clock speed difference; it is a fundamental architectural advantage.

Contextualizing these scores with the nearest rivals puts them in perspective. The RX 6500M's average score of 10,362 places it just below the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (10,582, delta -2.1%) and just above the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A (10,273, delta 0.9%). The GTX 850M's average of 9,302 sits between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9,273, delta 0.3%) and the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9,313, delta -0.1%). In other words, the RX 6500M punches at the level of a mid-range desktop GPU from a few years ago, while the GTX 850M sits at the bottom of that same class.

The pixel rate and texture rate differences reinforce the benchmark results. The RX 6500M's 76.80 GPixel/s and 153.6 GTexel/s dwarf the GTX 850M's 14.43 GPixel/s and 36.08 GTexel/s. These are not theoretical advantages; they directly impact fill-rate-bound workloads like high-resolution textures and complex shader effects. The RX 6500M also benefits from a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, while the GTX 850M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Despite the narrower lane count, the newer standard provides more bandwidth per lane, and the RX 6500M's memory system compensates with GDDR6.

The Verdict

The data does not support any scenario where the GTX 850M comes out ahead. The RX 6500M wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, holds a higher average score (10,362 versus 9,302), and sits at a higher percentile (48th versus 46th). The architectural advantages, from the 6 nm process to the 16 ray tracing cores to the 144.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, are decisive.

For a user considering these two GPUs, the choice depends on what they are running. If the workload involves modern APIs like Vulkan or compute-heavy tasks like OpenCL, the RX 6500M is the only rational pick. Its 399.2% Vulkan advantage and 292.9% OpenCL advantage leave no room for debate. The GTX 850M, with its 2014 Maxwell architecture and 2 GB of DDR3, is simply outclassed in every measurable way.

That said, the GTX 850M's place in the database is not without context. Its nearest rivals, the GeForce GTX 465 and Radeon R7 M380, are all within 0.3% of its average score. It was a competent GPU for its era, but that era ended long ago. The RX 6500M, despite being end-of-life itself, represents a completely different performance tier. Anyone choosing between these two based on the recorded data should pick the RX 6500M without hesitation. The only caveat is software compatibility: the GTX 850M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), which may be sufficient for older titles, but the RX 6500M's DirectX 12 Ultimate support ensures it can handle the latest rendering features, including ray tracing. The verdict is unambiguous.