FirePro W7000 Adapter vs GeForce GTX 1650
FirePro W7000 Adapter
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is positioned at rank #219 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W7000 Adapter
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2012). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro W7000 Adapter lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 79.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FirePro W7000 Adapter.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-79.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+79.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro W7000 Adapter offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $75 for the GeForce GTX 1650, it costs 80% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 178.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+178.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W7000 Adapter and GeForce GTX 1650
FirePro W7000 Adapter
The FirePro W7000 Adapter is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 13 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 950 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,383 points. Launch price was $899.
GeForce GTX 1650
The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the FirePro W7000 Adapter scores 4,383 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 79.5%. The FirePro W7000 Adapter is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 2.432 TFLOPS (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,383 | 7,869+80% |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280+43% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.432 TFLOPS | 2.984 TFLOPS+23% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80+43% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 896 KB+180% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 3.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.4+17% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+100% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: UVD vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | UVD | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W7000 Adapter draws 150W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 242mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 90°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 75W-50% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 242mm | 229mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 90°C | 70°C-22% |
| Perf/Watt | 29.2 | 104.9+259% |
Value Analysis
The FirePro W7000 Adapter launched at $899 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The FirePro W7000 Adapter costs 80% less ($60 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 292.2 (FirePro W7000 Adapter) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the FirePro W7000 Adapter offers 178.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2012).
| Feature | FirePro W7000 Adapter | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $899 | $149-83% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-80% | $75 |
| Performance per Dollar | 292.2+179% | 104.9 |
| Codename | Pitcairn | TU117 |
| Release | June 13 2012 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #477 | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on FirePro W7000 Adapter and GeForce GTX 1650
