AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range) vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 9 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- 2.1x more boost clock speed: 2200 MHz vs 1033 MHz
- 280.7x more texture fill rate: 17.60 GTexel/s vs 62.7 billion / sec
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 6 nm vs 28 nm
- 8.9x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 134 Watt
Launch date | 3 Jan 2023 vs 26 March 2013 |
Boost clock speed | 2200 MHz vs 1033 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 17.60 GTexel/s vs 62.7 billion / sec |
Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm vs 28 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 134 Watt |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 980 MHz vs 400 MHz
- 6x more pipelines: 768 vs 128
- Around 90% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9529 vs 5019
- Around 74% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 464 vs 266
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3375 vs 1109
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 980 MHz vs 400 MHz |
Pipelines | 768 vs 128 |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9529 vs 5019 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 464 vs 266 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3375 vs 1109 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range)
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range) | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5019 | 9529 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 266 | 464 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1109 | 3375 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 25.21 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 561.43 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.026 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.868 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 51.009 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3426 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3642 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3242 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3426 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3642 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3242 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1106 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon 610M (Dragon Range) | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Kepler |
Code name | Dragon Range | GK106 |
Launch date | 3 Jan 2023 | 26 March 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 812 | 815 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $169 | |
Type | Desktop | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 2200 MHz | 1033 MHz |
Compute units | 2 | |
Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 980 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 28 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 35.20 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 1,126 GFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 563.2 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 128 | 768 |
Pixel fill rate | 8.800 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 17.60 GTexel/s | 62.7 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 134 Watt |
CUDA cores | 768 | |
Floating-point performance | 1,585 gflops | |
Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | |
Transistor count | 2,540 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI... |
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
G-SYNC support | ||
HDCP | ||
HDMI | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Form factor | IGP | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | One 6-pin |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 2.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.3 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 144.2 GB / s |
Memory bus width | System Shared | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | System Shared | 6.0 GB/s |
Memory type | System Shared | GDDR5 |
Technologies |
||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision Live | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
CUDA | ||
FXAA | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |