GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 6500M
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 6500M
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 RX 6500M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 6500M is significantly newer (2022 vs 2012). The Radeon RX 6500M 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 GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX 6500M.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 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 GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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 Ti and Radeon RX 6500M
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 6500M
The Radeon RX 6500M 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 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,443 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the Radeon RX 6500M reaches 7,443 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 6500M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1,024 (Radeon RX 6500M). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 4.915 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6500M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525+1% | 7,443 |
| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1024+33% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 4.915 TFLOPS+245% |
| ROPs | 16 | 32+100% |
| TMUs | 64 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 256 KB+300% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6500M 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 Ti lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 144 GB/s (Radeon RX 6500M) — a 33.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1 MB (Radeon RX 6500M) — the Radeon RX 6500M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s+33% | 144 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12 (12_2) (Radeon RX 6500M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_2) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6500M). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) (Radeon RX 6500M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the Radeon RX 6500M's 50W — a 0% difference. The Radeon RX 6500M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon RX 6500M). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+1% | 148.9 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6500M is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $77 | — |
| Codename | GK106 | Navi 24 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #633 | #341 |
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 6500M
