GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Radeon RX 5300
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 5300 Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 5300 FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 5300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
2012Why buy it
- ✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 3 GB).
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon RX 5300 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌2012 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
- ❌16.3% HIGHER MSRP$150 MSRPvs$129 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 50.2 vs 59.0 G3D/$ ($150 MSRP vs $129 MSRP).
Radeon RX 5300
2020Why buy it
- ✅80.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($129 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 17.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 59.0 vs 50.2 G3D/$ ($129 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅Better long-term bet: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 3 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 5300 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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 RX 5300
The Radeon RX 5300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 28 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1327 MHz to 1645 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,606 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the Radeon RX 5300 reaches 7,606 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is built on Kepler while the Radeon RX 5300 uses RDNA 1.0, both on 28 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1,408 (Radeon RX 5300). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 4.632 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 5300).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525 | 7,606+1% |
| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1408+83% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 4.632 TFLOPS+225% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 64 | 88+38% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.5 MB+500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The clearest feature edge for the Radeon RX 5300 is support for FSR Frame Generation. In games that support it, that can smooth out motion and lift perceived FPS. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti does not have comparable native support in the same tier.The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon RX 5300 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR Frame Generation |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX 5300 carries 3 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti gives you 33.3% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 168 GB/s (Radeon RX 5300) — a 14.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and 96-bit on the Radeon RX 5300. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1.5 MB (Radeon RX 5300) — the Radeon RX 5300 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+33% | 3 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s+14% | 168 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+33% | 96-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1.5 MB+500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12.1 (Radeon RX 5300). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon RX 5300). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs VCN 2.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon RX 5300).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | VCN 2.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | VCN 2.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the Radeon RX 5300's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon RX 5300). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 180mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-50% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin |
| Length | 0mm | 180mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+98% | 76.1 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti came in at $150, while the Radeon RX 5300 launched at $129. On MSRP, Radeon RX 5300 was 14% cheaper ($21 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 50.2 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 59.0 (Radeon RX 5300) — the Radeon RX 5300 offers 17.5% better value. The newer card here is Radeon RX 5300 (2020 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 5300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | $129-14% |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.2 | 59.0+18% |
| Codename | GK106 | Navi 14 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | May 28 2020 |
| Ranking | #633 | #336 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
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 RX 5300
