RADEON HD 6350 vs GeForce 9650M GT
RADEON HD 6350
Popular choices:
GeForce 9650M GT
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 RADEON HD 6350 is positioned at rank 240 and the GeForce 9650M GT is on rank 679, 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 RADEON HD 6350
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9650M GT
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 | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| 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 | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+16.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) | ✅More affordable ($25) |
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 RADEON HD 6350 and GeForce 9650M GT
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The RADEON HD 6350 scores 141 and the GeForce 9650M GT reaches 137 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The RADEON HD 6350 is built on TeraScale 3 while the GeForce 9650M GT uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (RADEON HD 6350) vs 640 (GeForce 9650M GT). Raw compute: 1.92 TFLOPS (RADEON HD 6350) vs 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 9650M GT).
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 141+3% | 137 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280+100% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.92 TFLOPS+47% | 1.306 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+100% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RADEON HD 6350 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 9650M GT has 1 GB. 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: 0.5 MB (RADEON HD 6350) vs 2 MB (GeForce 9650M GT) — the GeForce 9650M GT has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 2 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.2 (11_0) (RADEON HD 6350) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9650M GT). OpenGL: 4.4 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.4+33% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (RADEON HD 6350) vs No NVENC (G96) (GeForce 9650M GT). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (RADEON HD 6350) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 (GeForce 9650M GT).
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No NVENC (G96) |
| Decoder | UVD 2.2 | PureVideo HD VP3 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON HD 6350 draws 186W versus the GeForce 9650M GT's 75W — a 85.1% difference. The GeForce 9650M GT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON HD 6350) vs 350W (GeForce 9650M GT). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 80°C.
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 186W | 75W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Height | 69mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.8 | 1.8+125% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON HD 6350 launched at $30 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce 9650M GT launched at $100 and now averages $25. The GeForce 9650M GT costs 16.7% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 4.7 (RADEON HD 6350) vs 5.5 (GeForce 9650M GT) — the GeForce 9650M GT offers 17% better value. The GeForce 9650M GT is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2011).
| Feature | RADEON HD 6350 | GeForce 9650M GT |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $30-70% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $25-17% |
| Performance per Dollar | 4.7 | 5.5+17% |
| Codename | Cayman | GM107 |
| Release | December 1 2011 | October 27 2015 |
| Ranking | #598 | #671 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON HD 6350 and GeForce 9650M GT
