Radeon Pro W5500X vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q

Place in the ranking	331	296
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	21.29
Power efficiency	23.10	10.54
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	TU117	Navi 14
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	2 April 2020 (4 years ago)	11 December 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$599

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1024	1536
Core clock speed	1035 MHz	1187 MHz
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	1757 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	125 Watt
Texture fill rate	76.80	168.7
Floating-point processing power	2.458 TFLOPS	5.398 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	96

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	224.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	No outputs	2x HDMI 2.0b
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.140	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 16.78

Pro W5500X 19.13
+14%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 6448

Pro W5500X 7350
+14%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	56 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
1440p	36 −11.1%	40−45 +11.1%
4K	24 −12.5%	27−30 +12.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	9.98
1440p	no data	14.98
4K	no data	22.19

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 −6.1%	35−40 +6.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Forza Horizon 4	77 −10.4%	85−90 +10.4%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Metro Exodus	56 −7.1%	60−65 +7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	63 −11.1%	70−75 +11.1%
Valorant	91 −9.9%	100−105 +9.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	13 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Dota 2	82 −9.8%	90−95 +9.8%
Far Cry 5	67 −11.9%	75−80 +11.9%
Fortnite	90−95 −8.7%	100−105 +8.7%
Forza Horizon 4	62 −12.9%	70−75 +12.9%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Grand Theft Auto V	67 −11.9%	75−80 +11.9%
Metro Exodus	38 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −10.2%	130−140 +10.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	40−45 −12.5%	45−50 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 −5.8%	55−60 +5.8%
Valorant	42 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
World of Tanks	200−210 −10%	230−240 +10%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Counter-Strike 2	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Dota 2	106 −13.2%	120−130 +13.2%
Far Cry 5	60−65 −8.3%	65−70 +8.3%
Forza Horizon 4	54 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 5	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 −10.2%	130−140 +10.2%
Valorant	65−70 −10.3%	75−80 +10.3%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	26 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	26 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 −9%	170−180 +9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
World of Tanks	110−120 −12.1%	130−140 +12.1%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Far Cry 5	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%
Forza Horizon 4	35 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	24−27 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Metro Exodus	35−40 −8.1%	40−45 +8.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Valorant	40−45 −7.1%	45−50 +7.1%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Dota 2	25 −8%	27−30 +8%
Grand Theft Auto V	25 −8%	27−30 +8%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 −10%	55−60 +10%
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 −8%	27−30 +8%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	52 −5.8%	55−60 +5.8%
Far Cry 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Fortnite	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 −7.7%	14−16 +7.7%
Valorant	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%

This is how GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and Pro W5500X compete in popular games:

Pro W5500X is 7% faster in 1080p
Pro W5500X is 11% faster in 1440p
Pro W5500X is 13% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.78	19.13
Recency	2 April 2020	11 December 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	125 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has an age advantage of 3 months, and 150% lower power consumption.

Pro W5500X, on the other hand, has a 14% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W5500X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a notebook card while Radeon Pro W5500X is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.