OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£270VRAM:8 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):165 W

ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

7.1/10

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
Score components

40%

6.4

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.6, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.8, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–¼Worse than 63% of graphics cards
7.7

Value for money

Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

â–²Better than 75%
6.4

Technical score

Technical score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components

44%

5.6

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 64%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.6.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £270
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC

Technical score
Technical score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 64% of models
Score components:

44%

5.6

Performance

24%

4.0

Memory

12%

9.3

Power

11%

9.0

Features

5%

8.7

Design

4%

9.7

Connectivity

6.4
Reviews score
7.6
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

7.7
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
10,174 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 10,174 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 70.1% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
10,174 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 10,174 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is higher than 55.3% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
18,486 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 18,486 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 65% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
9,239 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 9,239 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 63.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
22.08 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 22.08 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 52.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
8 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 8 GB of VRAM, which is less than 56.8% of graphics cards and equal to 25.7% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR6
This graphics card uses GDDR6 memory, which is newer than on 16.4% of graphics cards and equal to 40.3% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
288 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 288 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 69.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.5% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
18,000 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 18,000 MHz, which is slower than that of 51.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.9% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4
This graphics card supports PCIe 4, which is newer than on 22.5% of graphics cards and equal to 50.5% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x8
This graphics card uses x8 PCIe lanes, which is fewer than 75.9% of graphics cards and equal to 22.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12 Ultimate
This graphics card supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, which is more advanced than on 22.8% of graphics cards and equal to 77.2% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
7680x4320
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320, which is higher than that of 9.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 90.9% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
2.1
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 2.1, which is more advanced than on 66.4% of graphics cards and equal to 7.7% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
13.5 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 13.5 Gbps, which is slower than on 61.3% of graphics cards and equal to 1.8% of graphics cards.
Show more
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
165 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 165 W, which is lower than that of 65.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.5% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
170 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 170 W under peak load, which is lower than 66.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1.7% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
450 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 450 W PSU, which is lower than that of 84% of graphics cards and equal to that of 6.1% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
165 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 165 W, which is lower than that of 69.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
170 W
Show more
Size
249x 132x 41 mm
Length
249 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 249 mm long, which is shorter than 69.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.4% of graphics cards.
Height
132 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 132 mm tall, which is taller than 65.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1.2% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
?
Show more

ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 8.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 23.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (165 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    165 W vs 215 W
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    February 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 1.4a).
    2.1 vs 1.4a
  • 33.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (249 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    249 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 92.6% cheaper
    ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC is cheaper than the average graphics card (£270 vs £520).
    £270 vs £520
  • 8.8% higher boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a higher boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (2,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    2,725 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 2 years newer
    This graphics card was released more recently than the average graphics card (2025 vs 2023).
    February 2025
    2025 vs 2023
  • 28.6% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    2,250 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 8x more Infinity Cache
    This graphics card has more Infinity Cache than the average graphics card (32 MB vs 4 MB). The average graphics card has 4 MB Infinity Cache.
    32 MB vs 4 MB
  • Newer DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports a newer DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 1.4a).
    2.1 vs 1.4a
  • 30.8% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (450 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    450 W vs 650 W
  • 23.3% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (165 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    165 W vs 215 W
  • 25% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (165 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    165 W vs 220 W
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 33.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (249 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    249 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 56 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (128 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    128 vs 184
  • 8 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    32 vs 40
  • 8 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (32 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    32 vs 40
  • 10.4% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,720 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,720 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 31.2% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (10,174 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    10,174 points vs 14,779 points
  • 18.3% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (18,486 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    18,486 points vs 22,638 points
  • 7.7% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (348.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    348.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 2,304 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (2048 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    2,048 vs 4,352
  • 4 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (8 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    8 GB vs 12 GB
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 35.7% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    288 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 91.7% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (2 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    2 MB vs 24 MB
  • 5.3% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    18,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • Fewer PCIe lanes
    This graphics card has fewer PCIe lanes than the average graphics card (x8 vs x16). The average graphics card has x16 PCIe lanes.
    x8 vs x16
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (frame generation vs multi frame generation).
    frame generation vs multi frame generation
  • 20% larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (6 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    6 nm vs 5 nm
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 3).
    2.2 vs 3
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.7 vs 6.8).
    6.7 vs 6.8
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
    3 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 2.1a).
    2.1 vs 2.1a
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (110 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    110 °C vs 95 °C
  • 7 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (132 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    132 mm vs 125 mm

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC

  • Excellent price-to-performance ratio for 1080p and entry 1440p gaming
  • Extremely quiet operation under load with idle fan stop technology
  • Strong rasterization performance, often beating the RTX 4060
  • Stable drivers and performance under Linux operating systems
  • Efficient power consumption with a single 8-pin connector required
  • Includes colorful LED lighting for aesthetic builds

What customers don't like about ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC

  • Ray tracing performance is significantly weaker than Nvidia counterparts
  • Limited to 8GB of VRAM, which may bottleneck future high-texture games
  • Restricted bandwidth due to the 8-lane PCIe 4.0 interface
  • Lacks support for Nvidia-exclusive features like DLSS
  • Primarily a regional release (China-exclusive), making global availability difficult
  • Minimal performance gain over the standard RX 7600 model

Verdict

The ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC is a performance-tier graphics card based on the RDNA 3.0 architecture and the 6nm Navi 33 XL GPU, featuring 2048 shading units, 32 Ray Accelerators, and 64 AI cores. This factory-overclocked model reaches a boost clock of 2725 MHz and includes 8GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing an effective speed of 18 Gbps and 288 GB/s bandwidth. Main pros include its energy efficiency with a 170W TDP, silent dual-fan cooling system, and modern connectivity with three DisplayPort 2.1 outputs and HDMI 2.1. However, notable cons include its limited 8GB VRAM capacity for future high-resolution gaming and the restricted PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, which can bottleneck performance on older PCIe 3.0 motherboards.

Compare ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASRock Radeon RX 7650 GRE Challenger OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found