GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX Vega 3

Place in the ranking	775	266
Place by popularity	80	3
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	39.38
Power efficiency	13.73	18.81
Architecture	GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Picasso	TU117
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	6 January 2019 (5 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 cores	192	896
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1485 MHz
Boost clock speed	1001 MHz	1665 MHz
Number of transistors	4,940 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.01	93.24
Floating-point processing power	0.3844 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	32
TMUs	12	56

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	IGP	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	IGP	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	System Shared	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	4 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	128.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
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	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

RX Vega 3 2.98

GTX 1650 20.41
+585%

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.

RX Vega 3 1149

GTX 1650 7872
+585%

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.

RX Vega 3 1724

GTX 1650 13645
+692%

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.

RX Vega 3 5441

GTX 1650 44694
+722%

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.

RX Vega 3 1172

GTX 1650 9203
+686%

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.

RX Vega 3 8536

GTX 1650 50549
+492%

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.

RX Vega 3 80755

GTX 1650 373333
+362%

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	12 −458%	67 +458%
1440p	5−6 −640%	37 +640%
4K	3−4 −700%	24 +700%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.22
1440p	no data	4.03
4K	no data	6.21

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7

−433%

30−35
+433%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7 −657%	53 +657%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6 −683%	47 +683%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −1480%	79 +1480%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6 −767%	52 +767%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −433%	30−35 +433%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −967%	64 +967%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −900%	80 +900%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1331%	229 +1331%
Hitman 3	5 −880%	49 +880%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −1227%	292 +1227%
Metro Exodus	7 −1343%	101 +1343%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6 −1183%	77 +1183%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −858%	115 +858%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −474%	224 +474%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −822%	83 +822%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −3400%	35 +3400%
Battlefield 5	5−6 −1340%	72 +1340%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −557%	46 +557%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −433%	30−35 +433%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −767%	52 +767%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −600%	56 +600%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −1156%	201 +1156%
Hitman 3	8−9 −488%	47 +488%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 −1082%	260 +1082%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −2267%	71 +2267%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 −686%	55 +686%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	11 −573%	74 +573%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	17 −171%	45−50 +171%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −428%	206 +428%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 −178%	25 +178%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −1200%	13 +1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 −14.3%	8 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −433%	30−35 +433%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −550%	39 +550%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 −306%	65 +306%
Hitman 3	8−9 −413%	41 +413%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9 −567%	60 +567%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9 −589%	62 +589%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4 −950%	42 +950%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +85.7%	21 −85.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

−671%

54
+671%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −740%	42 +740%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 −800%	36 +800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −500%	18 +500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −1050%	21−24 +1050%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −700%	24 +700%
Hitman 3	8−9 −238%	27 +238%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −438%	43 +438%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −1100%	24−27 +1100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 −706%	145 +706%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−483%

35
+483%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −1900%	20 +1900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −750%	17 +750%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −550%	13 +550%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −400%	5 +400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −1000%	10−12 +1000%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1100%	12 +1100%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	30
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −700%	8 +700%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−325%

17
+325%

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

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

This is how RX Vega 3 and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 is 458% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 is 640% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 is 700% 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 RX Vega 3 is 86% faster.
in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 is 3400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega 3 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
GTX 1650 is ahead in 60 tests (85%)
there's a draw in 10 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.98	20.41
Recency	6 January 2019	23 April 2019
Chip lithography	14 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	75 Watt

RX Vega 3 has 400% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 584.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, and a 16.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 3 in performance tests.

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