GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Radeon Vega 8 Efficient

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated335
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data37.20
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameRavenTU117
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 April 2018 (6 years ago)23 April 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 cores5121024
Core clock speed300 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1125 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate35.2072.00
Floating-point processing power1.126 TFLOPS2.304 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs3264

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1751 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data112.1 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 outputsNo outputs

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
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 April 2018 23 April 2019
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

GTX 1650 Max-Q has an age advantage of 1 year, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 16.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 8 Efficient and GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 8 Efficient is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is a notebook 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 Vega 8 Efficient
Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

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.


2.9 53 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 617 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q 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.