Radeon RX Vega Nano vs GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking300not rated
Place by popularity70not in top-100
Power efficiency25.31no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameTU117Vega 10
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 April 2020 (4 years ago)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 cores10244096
Core clock speed1380 MHz1200 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz1546 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt175 Watt
Texture fill rate99.84395.8
Floating-point processing power3.195 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3264
TMUs64256

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data152 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeGDDR6HBM2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1600 MBps
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s409.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.0b, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1401.3
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 175 Watt

GTX 1650 Mobile has a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.

RX Vega Nano, on the other hand, has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile and Radeon RX Vega Nano. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is a notebook card while Radeon RX Vega Nano is a desktop one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
AMD Radeon RX Vega Nano
Radeon RX Vega Nano

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4 3310 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega Nano on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.