GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Radeon RX 780
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 780
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 780
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 780 is significantly newer (2024 vs 2012). The Radeon RX 780 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 RX 780 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% 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 Ti.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ FSR 3 / AFMF Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| 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 $721 for the Radeon RX 780, it costs 89% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 820.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+820.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($77) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($721) |
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 780
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 780
The Radeon RX 780 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 11 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2335 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 60 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,658 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the Radeon RX 780 reaches 7,658 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is built on Kepler while the Radeon RX 780 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 28 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 3,840 (Radeon RX 780). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 35.87 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 780).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525 | 7,658+2% |
| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 3840+400% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 35.87 TFLOPS+2417% |
| ROPs | 16 | 96+500% |
| TMUs | 64 | 240+275% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 768 KB+1100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 4 MB+1500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 780 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 780 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 4 MB (Radeon RX 780) — the Radeon RX 780 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 4 MB+1500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12 (12_2) (Radeon RX 780). 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 780 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_2) |
| 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 RDNA 3 Dual Media Engine (Radeon RX 780). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon RX 780).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | RDNA 3 Dual Media Engine |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the Radeon RX 780's 180W — a 113% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon RX 780). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-72% | 180W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75-12% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+254% | 42.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $77, while the Radeon RX 780 launched at $499 and now averages $721. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 89.3% less ($644 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 10.6 (Radeon RX 780) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 821.7% better value. The Radeon RX 780 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Radeon RX 780 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-70% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $77-89% | $721 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.7+822% | 10.6 |
| Codename | GK106 | Navi 32 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | September 11 2024 |
| Ranking | #633 | #131 |
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 780
