
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Radeon RX 6300M

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 6300M
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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is positioned at rank 5 and the Radeon RX 6300M is on rank 98, so the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Performance Per Dollar Radeon RX 6300M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon RX 6300M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon RX 6300M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and Radeon RX 6300M

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1125 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,314 points.

Radeon RX 6300M
The Radeon RX 6300M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,421 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q scores 6,314 and the Radeon RX 6300M reaches 6,421 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6300M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 768 (Radeon RX 6300M). Raw compute: 2.304 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300M). Boost clocks: 1125 MHz vs 2400 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,314 | 6,421+2% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024+33% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.304 TFLOPS | 3.686 TFLOPS+60% |
| Boost Clock | 1125 MHz | 2400 MHz+113% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64+33% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300M is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Native) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bandwidth: 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300M) — a 75% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q. Bus width: 128-bit vs 32-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 112 GB/s+75% | 64 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+300% | 32-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 12 Ultimate (Radeon RX 6300M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs Navi 24 Media. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (Radeon RX 6300M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Turing) | — |
| Decoder | NVDEC (4th Gen) | Navi 24 Media |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit | H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q draws 30W versus the Radeon RX 6300M's 35W — a 15.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 350W (Radeon RX 6300M). Power connectors: Mobile vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | Radeon RX 6300M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-14% | 35W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | Mobile |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 70°C-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 210.5+15% | 183.5 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















