CPU
GPU
GeForce 9650M GT
Popular choices:
RADEON HD 6350
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 9650M GT is positioned at rank 679 and the RADEON HD 6350 is on rank 240, so the RADEON HD 6350 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9650M GT
Performance Per Dollar RADEON HD 6350
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON HD 6350 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 9650M GT offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 9650M GT offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 9650M GT holds the technical lead. Priced at $25 (vs $30), it costs 17% less, resulting in a 16.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+16.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($25) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 9650M GT and RADEON HD 6350
GeForce 9650M GT
The GeForce 9650M GT is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 27 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 137 points.
RADEON HD 6350
The RADEON HD 6350 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 186W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 141 points. Launch price was $180.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9650M GT scores 137 and the RADEON HD 6350 reaches 141 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9650M GT is built on Maxwell while the RADEON HD 6350 uses TeraScale 3, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 1,280 (RADEON HD 6350). Raw compute: 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 1.92 TFLOPS (RADEON HD 6350).
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 137 | 141+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 1280+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.306 TFLOPS | 1.92 TFLOPS+47% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 40 | 80+100% |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 9650M GT comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the RADEON HD 6350 has 512 MB. The GeForce 9650M GT offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 0.5 MB (RADEON HD 6350) — the GeForce 9650M GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 11.2 (11_0) (RADEON HD 6350). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4+33% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No NVENC (G96) (GeForce 9650M GT) vs None (RADEON HD 6350). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP3 vs UVD 2.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 (GeForce 9650M GT) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (RADEON HD 6350).
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No NVENC (G96) | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP3 | UVD 2.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9650M GT draws 75W versus the RADEON HD 6350's 186W — a 85.1% difference. The GeForce 9650M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 350W (RADEON HD 6350). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-60% | 186W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 70-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 1.8+125% | 0.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 9650M GT launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $25, while the RADEON HD 6350 launched at $30 and now averages $30. The GeForce 9650M GT costs 16.7% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.5 (GeForce 9650M GT) vs 4.7 (RADEON HD 6350) — the GeForce 9650M GT offers 17% better value. The GeForce 9650M GT is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GT | RADEON HD 6350 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | $30-70% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-17% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.5+17% | 4.7 |
| Codename | GM107 | Cayman |
| Release | October 27 2015 | December 1 2011 |
| Ranking | #671 | #598 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9650M GT and RADEON HD 6350
