GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) with GeForce GTX 1650, including specs and performance data.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
2022
4.43

GTX 1650 outperforms Graphics (Ryzen 7000) by a whopping 361% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking667269
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data38.84
Power efficiencyno data18.67
ArchitectureRDNA 2 (2022−2023)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRaphaelTU117
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 September 2022 (2 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores128896
Core clock speedno data1485 MHz
Boost clock speed2200 MHz1665 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data93.24
Floating-point processing powerno data2.984 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data56

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_212 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
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.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 4.43
GTX 1650 20.43
+361%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 3026
GTX 1650 13645
+351%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 11703
GTX 1650 44694
+282%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 2338
GTX 1650 9203
+294%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 15247
GTX 1650 50549
+232%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) 159603
GTX 1650 373333
+134%

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 HD17
−306%
69
+306%
1440p8−9
−388%
39
+388%
4K4−5
−450%
22
+450%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.16
1440pno data3.82
4Kno data6.77

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−300%
30−35
+300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−342%
53
+342%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−1075%
47
+1075%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−690%
79
+690%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−420%
52
+420%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−300%
30−35
+300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−611%
64
+611%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−567%
80
+567%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−781%
229
+781%
Hitman 3 10−11
−390%
49
+390%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−907%
292
+907%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−1022%
101
+1022%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−600%
77
+600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
−619%
115
+619%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−409%
224
+409%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−592%
83
+592%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−775%
35
+775%
Battlefield 5 10−11
−620%
72
+620%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−360%
46
+360%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−300%
30−35
+300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−478%
52
+478%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
−367%
56
+367%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−673%
201
+673%
Hitman 3 10−11
−370%
47
+370%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
−797%
260
+797%
Metro Exodus 9−10
−689%
71
+689%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−400%
55
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 11
−573%
74
+573%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−171%
45−50
+171%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−368%
206
+368%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
−108%
25
+108%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
−225%
13
+225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+25%
8
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
−300%
30−35
+300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−333%
39
+333%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
−150%
65
+150%
Hitman 3 10−11
−310%
41
+310%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9
−567%
60
+567%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9
−589%
62
+589%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
−147%
42
+147%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+110%
21
−110%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−391%
54
+391%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
−425%
42
+425%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
−414%
36
+414%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−350%
18
+350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−475%
21−24
+475%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−380%
24
+380%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−1643%
122
+1643%
Hitman 3 9−10
−200%
27
+200%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−330%
43
+330%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−4000%
41
+4000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−437%
145
+437%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
−338%
35
+338%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−567%
20
+567%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−467%
17
+467%
Hitman 3 0−1 13
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1950%
41
+1950%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−2600%
27
+2600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 26

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−333%
13
+333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
−150%
5
+150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−450%
10−12
+450%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−900%
30
+900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−700%
8
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−240%
17
+240%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+0%
26
+0%

This is how Graphics (Ryzen 7000) and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 306% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 388% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 is 450% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is 110% faster.
  • in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 is 4000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
  • GTX 1650 is ahead in 64 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.43 20.43
Recency 26 September 2022 23 April 2019
Chip lithography 6 nm 12 nm

Graphics (Ryzen 7000) has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 361.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 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.


AMD Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

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.


3.3 243 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics (Ryzen 7000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23772 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.