GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon Pro 580X
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Popular choices:
Radeon Pro 580X
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro 580X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon Pro 580X is significantly newer (2019 vs 2012). The Radeon Pro 580X likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro 580X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $77 versus $200 for the Radeon Pro 580X, it costs 62% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 159.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+159.2%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($77) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) |
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 Ti and Radeon Pro 580X
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 9 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 928 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,525 points. Launch price was $149.
Radeon Pro 580X
The Radeon Pro 580X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 18 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,540 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the Radeon Pro 580X reaches 7,540 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is built on Kepler while the Radeon Pro 580X uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 2,304 (Radeon Pro 580X). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 5.53 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 580X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525 | 7,540 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 2304+200% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 5.53 TFLOPS+288% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 64 | 144+125% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 576 KB+800% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro 580X has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro 580X offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro 580X) — the Radeon Pro 580X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12.0 (Radeon Pro 580X). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro 580X). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro 580X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the Radeon Pro 580X's 150W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon Pro 580X). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-67% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+199% | 50.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $77, while the Radeon Pro 580X launched at $600 and now averages $200. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 61.5% less ($123 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 37.7 (Radeon Pro 580X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 159.2% better value. The Radeon Pro 580X is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon Pro 580X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-75% | $600 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $77-62% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.7+159% | 37.7 |
| Codename | GK106 | Polaris 20 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | March 18 2019 |
| Ranking | #633 | #339 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and Radeon Pro 580X
