Radeon Pro W5300M vs GeForce GTX 1650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking264not rated
Place by popularity3not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.47no data
Power efficiency18.84no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameTU117Navi 14
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)13 November 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

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 cores8961280
Core clock speed1485 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed1665 MHz1250 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt85 Watt
Texture fill rate93.24100.0
Floating-point processing power2.984 TFLOPS3.2 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs5680

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s192.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 April 2019 13 November 2019
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 85 Watt

GTX 1650 has 13.3% lower power consumption.

Pro W5300M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon Pro W5300M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro W5300M is a mobile workstation 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
GeForce GTX 1650
AMD Radeon Pro W5300M
Radeon Pro W5300M

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.


3.8 23144 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Pro W5300M 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.