GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon R9 285

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. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank #160 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

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

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 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2014). 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 R9 285 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon R9 285 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.6% 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 with Max-Q Design.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon R9 285 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 R9 285 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon R9 285

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 R9 285

The Radeon R9 285 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,680 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Radeon R9 285 reaches 6,680 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 285 uses GCN 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 285). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
G3D Mark Score	6,574	6,680+2%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1792+75%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	3.29 TFLOPS+34%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	112+75%
L1 Cache	1 MB+127%	0.44 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 285) — a 9.1% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	192 GB/s+9%	176 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 285). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.0
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6+5%	4.4
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 285). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 5.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (Radeon R9 285).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 5.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	MPEG-2,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon R9 285's 190W — a 116.7% 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 500W (Radeon R9 285). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 65°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 285
TDP	50W-74%	190W
Recommended PSU	350W-30%	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	2x 6-pin
Length	—	221mm
Height	—	109mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	65°C-13%
Perf/Watt	131.5+274%	35.2