GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon Pro WX 7130

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 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank 160 and the Radeon Pro WX 7130 is on rank 183, so the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

#42

Radeon RX 6600S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

98%

#43

Radeon RX 8060S

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

97%

#47

Radeon RX 6700S

MSRP: $479|Avg: $300

95%

#150

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

329%

#152

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

298%

#153

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

297%

#157

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

270%

#158

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

268%

#160

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#172

GeForce GT 540M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro WX 7130

#81

Tesla T10

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $975

98%

#82

RTX A5000

MSRP: $3721|Avg: $1800

96%

#83

Radeon Pro Vega 64X

MSRP: $2200|Avg: $2200

95%

#84

Radeon PRO V710

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $2000

94%

#85

RTX A5500

MSRP: $3600|Avg: $2200

91%

#86

Radeon Pro WX 9100

MSRP: $2199|Avg: $550

87%

#168

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

2305%

#183

Radeon Pro WX 7130

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $200

100%

#184

FirePro W7100

MSRP: $799|Avg: $114

99%

#185

P106-090

MSRP: $389|Avg: $30

99%

#186

Radeon Pro WX 4130

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

98%

#188

Tesla M6

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $84

97%

#190

CMP 30HX

MSRP: $799|Avg: $60

95%

#191

FirePro W2100

MSRP: $139|Avg: $30

95%

#193

FirePro M6000

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

95%

#196

FirePro M4170

MSRP: $200|Avg: $80

91%

#197

GRID K140Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $500

91%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon Pro WX 7130 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon Pro WX 7130 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+2.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))
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

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design 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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro WX 7130 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon Pro WX 7130

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.

Radeon Pro WX 7130

The Radeon Pro WX 7130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 10 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1188 MHz to 1243 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,406 points. Launch price was $799.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Radeon Pro WX 7130 reaches 6,406 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro WX 7130 uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2,304 (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 5.728 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1243 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
G3D Mark Score	6,574+3%	6,406
Architecture	Turing	GCN 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1024	2304+125%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	5.728 TFLOPS+133%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz	1243 MHz+4%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	144+125%
L1 Cache	1 MB+79%	0.56 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
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 with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro WX 7130 has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 7130 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro WX 7130) — the Radeon Pro WX 7130 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 7130).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.4
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 6.3
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon Pro WX 7130's 130W — a 88.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.