GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R5 M315

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M315 with GeForce GTX 1650, including specs and performance data.

R5 M315
2015
4 GB DDR3
1.23

GTX 1650 outperforms R5 M315 by a whopping 1562% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1046269
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data38.83
Power efficiencyno data18.68
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameMesoTU117
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 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 cores384896
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed970 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data75 Watt
Texture fill rate23.2893.24
Floating-point processing power0.745 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2456

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s128.0 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.

HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.06.5
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCLNot Listed1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
Mantle+-
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.

R5 M315 1.23
GTX 1650 20.44
+1562%

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.

R5 M315 473
GTX 1650 7874
+1565%

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.

R5 M315 920
GTX 1650 9203
+900%

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.

R5 M315 5040
GTX 1650 50549
+903%

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 HD4−5
−1625%
69
+1625%
1440p2−3
−1850%
39
+1850%
4K1−2
−2100%
22
+2100%

Cost per frame, $

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−783%
53
+783%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1200%
52
+1200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6300%
64
+6300%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−2567%
80
+2567%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−11350%
229
+11350%
Hitman 3 6−7
−717%
49
+717%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−1986%
292
+1986%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3750%
77
+3750%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−1338%
115
+1338%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−579%
224
+579%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−1283%
83
+1283%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−1050%
46
+1050%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−5100%
52
+5100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−1767%
56
+1767%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−9950%
201
+9950%
Hitman 3 6−7
−683%
47
+683%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−1757%
260
+1757%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2650%
55
+2650%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−825%
74
+825%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−318%
45−50
+318%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−524%
206
+524%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−317%
25
+317%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−100%
8
+100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3800%
39
+3800%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−3150%
65
+3150%
Hitman 3 6−7
−583%
41
+583%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−329%
60
+329%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
−675%
62
+675%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
−282%
42
+282%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+57.1%
21
−57.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2600%
54
+2600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−4100%
42
+4100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1700%
36
+1700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1700%
18
+1700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 21−24
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2300%
24
+2300%
Hitman 3 7−8
−286%
27
+286%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−975%
43
+975%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 24−27
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
−2317%
145
+2317%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−775%
35
+775%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 17

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1200%
13
+1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−400%
5
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 10−12
Far Cry 5 0−1 12

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−467%
17
+467%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
+0%
47
+0%
Battlefield 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Metro Exodus 101
+0%
101
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
+0%
35
+0%
Battlefield 5 72
+0%
72
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 122
+0%
122
+0%
Metro Exodus 41
+0%
41
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Hitman 3 13
+0%
13
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+0%
26
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
+0%
8
+0%

This is how R5 M315 and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 1625% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 1850% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 is 2100% 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 R5 M315 is 57% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 is 11350% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 M315 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • GTX 1650 is ahead in 46 tests (69%)
  • there's a draw in 20 tests (30%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.23 20.44
Recency 5 May 2015 23 April 2019
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

GTX 1650 has a 1561.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M315 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 M315 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 R5 M315
Radeon R5 M315
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.


3.1 9 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M315 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23784 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.