GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
33.53
+27.1%

Pro Vega 64 outperforms GTX 1650 SUPER by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking159208
Place by popularitynot in top-10059
Power efficiency9.1918.09
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameVega 10TU116
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)22 November 2019 (5 years ago)

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 cores40961280
Core clock speed1250 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1725 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate345.6138.0
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPS4.416 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs25680

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 3.0 x16
Length267 mm229 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-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 typeHBM2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount16 GB4 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+
Multi Monitorno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.2.131
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.

Pro Vega 64 33.53
+27.1%
GTX 1650 SUPER 26.38

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.

Pro Vega 64 12920
+27.1%
GTX 1650 SUPER 10166

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 71257
+27.8%
GTX 1650 SUPER 55741

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 73720
+38.2%
GTX 1650 SUPER 53337

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 HD85−90
+23.2%
69
−23.2%
1440p40−45
+14.3%
35
−14.3%
4K24−27
+14.3%
21
−14.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 63
+0%
63
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 53
+0%
53
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+0%
50
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 62
+0%
62
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 69
+0%
69
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 84
+0%
84
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+0%
180
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
+0%
26
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 59
+0%
59
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 82
+0%
82
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
+0%
101
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+0%
180
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
+0%
15
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+0%
34
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 53
+0%
53
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 83
+0%
83
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+0%
83
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+0%
50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
+0%
21
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 66
+0%
66
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+0%
20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 34
+0%
34
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 55
+0%
55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60
+0%
60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 164
+0%
164
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 44
+0%
44
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hitman 3 34
+0%
34
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+0%
32
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
+0%
5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+0%
3
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+0%
30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
+0%
8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+0%
21
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and GTX 1650 SUPER compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64 is 23% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 14% faster in 1440p
  • Pro Vega 64 is 14% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.53 26.38
Recency 27 June 2017 22 November 2019
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 100 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 27.1% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 SUPER, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 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 Pro Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

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.


4.3 19 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 4764 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER 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.