FireStream 9270 vs GeForce GTX 1650

CPU

GPU

FireStream 9270

2008Core: 750 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

FireStream 9270

160

1,341

0.0%

Radeon R7 A10-7800

Radeon Vega 3

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 8570 Dual

7,869

+486.8%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

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 FireStream 9270 is positioned at rank #359 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar FireStream 9270

#344

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

16599%

#359

FireStream 9270

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $20

100%

#360

Quadro 400

MSRP: $169|Avg: $500

99%

#361

FirePro 2260

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

99%

#362

Quadro FX 380 LP

MSRP: $169|Avg: $15

97%

#364

Quadro FX 1800

MSRP: $489|Avg: $100

91%

#365

FirePro 3D V8700

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $1229

90%

#366

FirePro 3D V9800

MSRP: $3499|Avg: $80

90%

#367

Quadro 5000

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $100

89%

#368

FirePro V5700

MSRP: $599|Avg: $20

88%

#369

FirePro V9800

MSRP: $3499|Avg: $250

88%

#370

FirePro 3D V8750

MSRP: $1799|Avg: $500

80%

#371

FirePro 3D V7750

MSRP: $799|Avg: $20

76%

#372

GRID M10-2B

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $80

74%

#373

Quadro FX 370

MSRP: $129|Avg: $500

73%

#374

Quadro 6000

MSRP: $4399|Avg: $150

69%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2008). 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 FireStream 9270 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 486.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the FireStream 9270.

Insight	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-486.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+486.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / TeraScale (2005−2013))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $20), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 56.5% better value per dollar than the FireStream 9270.

Insight	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+56.5%)
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($20)	⚠️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.

FireStream 9270 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of FireStream 9270 and GeForce GTX 1650

FireStream 9270

The FireStream 9270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2008. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,341 points.

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 FireStream 9270 scores 1,341 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 486.8%. The FireStream 9270 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 55 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 800 (FireStream 9270) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 1.2 TFLOPS (FireStream 9270) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	1,341	7,869+487%
Architecture	TeraScale	Turing
Process Node	55 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	800	896+12%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.2 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+149%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	40	56+40%
L1 Cache	160 KB	896 KB+460%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	FireStream 9270	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)

The FireStream 9270 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FireStream 9270) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 10.1 (FireStream 9270) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 3.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	10.1	12+19%
OpenGL	3.3	4.6+39%
Max Displays	1	3+200%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (FireStream 9270) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (FireStream 9270) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	None	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	UVD 2.2	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The FireStream 9270 draws 160W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 72.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FireStream 9270) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 241mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.

Feature	FireStream 9270	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	160W	75W-53%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	241mm	229mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	85°C	70°C-18%
Perf/Watt	8.4	104.9+1149%

💰

Value Analysis

The FireStream 9270 launched at $1499 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The FireStream 9270 costs 73.3% less ($55 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 67.0 (FireStream 9270) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 56.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2008).