GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon RX Vega M GH

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

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX Vega M GH.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100+%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 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 RX Vega M GH Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon RX Vega M GH

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 RX Vega M GH

The Radeon RX Vega M GH is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 1 2018. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1063 MHz to 1190 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,548 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Radeon RX Vega M GH reaches 6,548 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon RX Vega M GH uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1,536 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3.656 TFLOPS (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1190 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
G3D Mark Score	6,574	6,548
Architecture	Turing	GCN 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1024	1536+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS+49%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz	1190 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	64	96+50%
L1 Cache	1 MB+163%	0.38 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
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 RX Vega M GH has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 204.8 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega M GH) — a 6.7% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega M GH. Bus width: 128-bit vs 1024-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR6	HBM2
Memory Bandwidth	192 GB/s	204.8 GB/s+7%
Bus Width	128-bit	1024-bit+700%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12_1 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12_1
Max Displays	4	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 6.3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 6.3
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon RX Vega M GH's 100W — a 66.7% 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 1W (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Integrated.