Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon 2100

CPUCPUGPUGPU
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz
GTX family
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
AMD

Radeon 2100

2019Core: 730 MHzBoost: 1024 MHz
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon 2100 Performance Spectrum

GeForce GTX 1650
4 GB 75
7,869
+13015.0%
brand logoGeForce GTX 880M SLI
brand logoGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
brand logoGeForce GTX 960
brand logoGeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)
brand logoGeForce RTX 3050 OEM
brand logoGeForce GTX 1080
brand logoGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
brand logoGeForce RTX 3070 Ti
Radeon 2100
0.5 GB 50
60
0.0%
brand logoMobility Radeon X1450
brand logoMobility Radeon X1300
brand logoMOBILITY RADEON 9800
brand logoMobility Radeon HD 2300
brand logoRadeon RX 560X (móvel)
brand logoRadeon R9 Fury
brand logoRadeon RX 5700
brand logoRadeon RX 6700

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 vs Radeon 2100 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

Path of Exile 2

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low94 FPS
medium83 FPS
high70 FPS
ultra58 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low136 FPS
medium113 FPS
high94 FPS
ultra71 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low323 FPS
medium283 FPS
high205 FPS
ultra169 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low261 FPS
medium211 FPS
high191 FPS
ultra166 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low60 FPS
medium60 FPS
high60 FPS
ultra60 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low166 FPS
medium154 FPS
high145 FPS
ultra119 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low77 FPS
medium59 FPS
high48 FPS
ultra34 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low59 FPS
medium41 FPS
high34 FPS
ultra25 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low79 FPS
medium62 FPS
high49 FPS
ultra36 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
GeForce GTX 1650
low75 FPS
medium59 FPS
high46 FPS
ultra35 FPS
1080P
Radeon 2100
low3 FPS
medium2 FPS
high2 FPS
ultra1 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon 2100: 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

2019

Why buy it

  • ✅6866.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
  • ✅Delivers 13015% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0.4 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
  • ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
  • ✅Radeon 2100 is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
  • ❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.

Radeon 2100

2019

Why buy it

  • ✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
  • ❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • ❌2019 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
  • ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.4 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 6866.0% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 13015% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 60), so the answer here is pretty clean.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 512 MB of VRAM and a 12nm process instead of 28nm. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is priced the same on MSRP at $149 vs $149, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 13015% (52.8 vs 0.4), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon 2100 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

AMD

Radeon 2100

The Radeon 2100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 60 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon 2100's 60 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 13015%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon 2100 uses GCN 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (Radeon 2100). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.7864 TFLOPS (Radeon 2100). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1024 MHz.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
G3D Mark Score
7,869+13015%
60
Architecture
Turing
GCN 3.0
Process Node
12 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
896+133%
384
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.984 TFLOPS+279%
0.7864 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1665 MHz+63%
1024 MHz
ROPs
32+300%
8
TMUs
56+133%
24
L1 Cache
896 KB+833%
96 KB
L2 Cache
1 MB+669%
0.13 MB
✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon 2100 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
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 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon 2100 carries 512 MB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 700% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the Radeon 2100. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.13 MB (Radeon 2100) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
VRAM Capacity
4 GB+700%
0.5 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
128-bit+100%
64-bit
L2 Cache
1 MB+669%
0.13 MB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 9.0b (Radeon 2100). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 2.0. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
DirectX
12+33%
9.0b
OpenGL
4.6+130%
2.0
Max Displays
3+50%
2
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Avivo (Radeon 2100). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Avivo. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (Radeon 2100).

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
Encoder
NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Avivo
Decoder
NVDEC 4th gen
Avivo
Codecs
H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9
MPEG-2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon 2100's 50W — a 40% difference. The Radeon 2100 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon 2100). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
TDP
75W
50W-33%
Recommended PSU
300W-14%
350W
Power Connector
None
PCIe-powered
Length
229mm
—
Height
111mm
—
Slots
2
0-100%
Temp (Load)
70°C
—
Perf/Watt
104.9+8642%
1.2
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon 2100 launched at $149. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.4 (Radeon 2100) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 13100% better value.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Radeon 2100
MSRP
$149
$149
Performance per Dollar
52.8+13100%
0.4
Codename
TU117
Polaris 24
Release
April 23 2019
May 13 2019
Ranking
#323
#898
Search GeForce GTX 1650 on AmazonSearch Radeon 2100 on Amazon

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.