Radeon PRO W7700 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile

Place in the ranking	274	36
Place by popularity	62	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	69.53
Power efficiency	27.92	21.44
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	TU116	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	23 April 2020 (4 years ago)	13 November 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

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	3072
Core clock speed	1350 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	1485 MHz	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	95.04	499.2
Floating-point processing power	3.041 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	96
TMUs	64	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	48

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 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 8-pin

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	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1500 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	576.0 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

4x DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.2
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 Mobile 20.28

PRO W7700 59.17
+192%

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 Mobile 7796

PRO W7700 22747
+192%

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	59 −188%	170−180 +188%
1440p	43 −179%	120−130 +179%
4K	25 −180%	70−75 +180%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	5.88
1440p	no data	8.33
4K	no data	14.27

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	42 −186%	120−130 +186%
Cyberpunk 2077	59 −188%	170−180 +188%
Elden Ring	57 −181%	160−170 +181%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	59 −188%	170−180 +188%
Counter-Strike 2	36 −178%	100−105 +178%
Cyberpunk 2077	40 −175%	110−120 +175%
Forza Horizon 4	95 −184%	270−280 +184%
Metro Exodus	66 −188%	190−200 +188%
Red Dead Redemption 2	44 −173%	120−130 +173%
Valorant	98 −186%	280−290 +186%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 −181%	180−190 +181%
Counter-Strike 2	30 −183%	85−90 +183%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 −181%	90−95 +181%
Dota 2	90 −189%	260−270 +189%
Elden Ring	73 −188%	210−220 +188%
Far Cry 5	70 −186%	200−210 +186%
Fortnite	100−110 −180%	300−310 +180%
Forza Horizon 4	75 −180%	210−220 +180%
Grand Theft Auto V	76 −189%	220−230 +189%
Metro Exodus	45 −189%	130−140 +189%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −157%	350−400 +157%
Red Dead Redemption 2	29 −176%	80−85 +176%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 −181%	180−190 +181%
Valorant	48 −192%	140−150 +192%
World of Tanks	230−240 −179%	650−700 +179%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	52 −188%	150−160 +188%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −178%	100−105 +178%
Cyberpunk 2077	29 −176%	80−85 +176%
Dota 2	112 −168%	300−310 +168%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −184%	190−200 +184%
Forza Horizon 4	63 −186%	180−190 +186%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −157%	350−400 +157%
Valorant	80−85 −180%	230−240 +180%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −181%	90−95 +181%
Elden Ring	30−35 −179%	95−100 +179%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −188%	95−100 +188%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −191%	500−550 +191%
Red Dead Redemption 2	17 −165%	45−50 +165%
World of Tanks	130−140 −155%	350−400 +155%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	41 −168%	110−120 +168%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	16 −181%	45−50 +181%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −191%	160−170 +191%
Forza Horizon 4	50−55 −188%	150−160 +188%
Metro Exodus	45−50 −183%	130−140 +183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −186%	80−85 +186%
Valorant	50−55 −188%	150−160 +188%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Dota 2	30−35 −179%	95−100 +179%
Elden Ring	14−16 −167%	40−45 +167%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −179%	95−100 +179%
Metro Exodus	14−16 −167%	40−45 +167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −179%	170−180 +179%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −169%	35−40 +169%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 −179%	95−100 +179%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	22 −173%	60−65 +173%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −165%	45−50 +165%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 −167%	16−18 +167%
Dota 2	52 −188%	150−160 +188%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −188%	75−80 +188%
Fortnite	24−27 −192%	70−75 +192%
Forza Horizon 4	30−33 −183%	85−90 +183%
Valorant	24−27 −192%	70−75 +192%

This is how GTX 1650 Ti Mobile and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

PRO W7700 is 188% faster in 1080p
PRO W7700 is 179% faster in 1440p
PRO W7700 is 180% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.28	59.17
Recency	23 April 2020	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	190 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile has 280% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 191.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 140% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

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