Radeon Pro VII vs GeForce GTX 1650

Place in the ranking	272	163
Place by popularity	3	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	37.78	16.33
Power efficiency	18.80	9.23
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	TU117	Vega 20
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	13 May 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$1,899

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 has 131% better value for money than Pro VII.

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	896	3840
Core clock speed	1485 MHz	1400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1665 MHz	1700 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	13,230 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.24	408.0
Floating-point processing power	2.984 TFLOPS	13.06 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	56	240

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	305 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin + 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	GDDR5	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	4096 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.0 GB/s	1024 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
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	1.2.131	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 20.48

Pro VII 33.53
+63.7%

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 7875

Pro VII 12890
+63.7%

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	69 −59.4%	110−120 +59.4%
1440p	40 −62.5%	65−70 +62.5%
4K	23 −52.2%	35−40 +52.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.16 +699%	17.26 −699%
1440p	3.73 +684%	29.22 −684%
4K	6.48 +738%	54.26 −738%

GTX 1650 has 699% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1650 has 684% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1650 has 738% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −62.2%	60−65 +62.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −58.5%	65−70 +58.5%
Elden Ring	65−70 −53.8%	100−105 +53.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	66 −51.5%	100−105 +51.5%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −62.2%	60−65 +62.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Forza Horizon 4	94 −59.6%	150−160 +59.6%
Metro Exodus	66 −51.5%	100−105 +51.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	77 −55.8%	120−130 +55.8%
Valorant	85 −52.9%	130−140 +52.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75 −60%	120−130 +60%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −62.2%	60−65 +62.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 −50%	21−24 +50%
Dota 2	82 −58.5%	130−140 +58.5%
Elden Ring	65−70 −53.8%	100−105 +53.8%
Far Cry 5	90 −55.6%	140−150 +55.6%
Fortnite	82 −58.5%	130−140 +58.5%
Forza Horizon 4	74 −62.2%	120−130 +62.2%
Grand Theft Auto V	75 −60%	120−130 +60%
Metro Exodus	44 −59.1%	70−75 +59.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −60.6%	220−230 +60.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	28 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −53.8%	100−105 +53.8%
Valorant	46 −63%	75−80 +63%
World of Tanks	230−240 −48.9%	350−400 +48.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55 −63.6%	90−95 +63.6%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −62.2%	60−65 +62.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −50%	18−20 +50%
Dota 2	92 −63%	150−160 +63%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −61.8%	110−120 +61.8%
Forza Horizon 4	62 −61.3%	100−105 +61.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	61 −55.7%	95−100 +55.7%
Valorant	70 −57.1%	110−120 +57.1%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −56.3%	50−55 +56.3%
Elden Ring	30−35 −61.8%	55−60 +61.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −51.5%	50−55 +51.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −62.8%	280−290 +62.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2	17 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
World of Tanks	130−140 −58.3%	220−230 +58.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	38 −57.9%	60−65 +57.9%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −42.9%	10−11 +42.9%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −60.7%	90−95 +60.7%
Forza Horizon 4	45 −55.6%	70−75 +55.6%
Metro Exodus	41 −58.5%	65−70 +58.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −60.7%	45−50 +60.7%
Valorant	40 −62.5%	65−70 +62.5%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Dota 2	29 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%
Elden Ring	14−16 −60%	24−27 +60%
Grand Theft Auto V	29 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%
Metro Exodus	12 −50%	18−20 +50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −61.3%	100−105 +61.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −61.5%	21−24 +61.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29 −55.2%	45−50 +55.2%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18 −50%	27−30 +50%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 −58.8%	27−30 +58.8%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Dota 2	59 −61%	95−100 +61%
Far Cry 5	24−27 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Fortnite	24−27 −60%	40−45 +60%
Forza Horizon 4	26 −53.8%	40−45 +53.8%
Valorant	21 −42.9%	30−33 +42.9%

This is how GTX 1650 and Pro VII compete in popular games:

Pro VII is 59% faster in 1080p
Pro VII is 63% faster in 1440p
Pro VII is 52% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.48	33.53
Recency	23 April 2019	13 May 2020
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	250 Watt

GTX 1650 has 233.3% lower power consumption.

Pro VII, on the other hand, has a 63.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro VII is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro VII is a workstation one.

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