GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Radeon RX Vega M GH
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon RX Vega M GH Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon RX Vega M GH FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon RX Vega M GH: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
2020Why buy it
- ✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
- ✅Radeon RX Vega M GH is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the less risky modern option long term.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon RX Vega M GH across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
Radeon RX Vega M GH
2018Why buy it
- ✅6.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2018 hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
- ❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs Radeon RX Vega M GH Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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)
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon RX Vega M GH leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX Vega M GH |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX Vega M GH carries 0 MB. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design gives you 100+% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. 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. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and 1024-bit on the Radeon RX Vega M GH.
| 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.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX Vega M GH |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-50% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Integrated |
| Length | — | 1mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 131.5+101% | 65.5 |
Value Analysis
The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design (2020 vs 2018).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | Radeon RX Vega M GH |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $0 |
| Codename | TU117 | Polaris 22 |
| Release | April 2 2020 | February 1 2018 |
| Ranking | #371 | #373 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
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 with Max-Q Design and Radeon RX Vega M GH
