GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Pro WX 3200

CPU

GPU

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

GTX family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Radeon Pro WX 3200

2019Core: 1082 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 Performance Spectrum

GeForce GTX 1650

4 GB 75

7,869

+256.2%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

Radeon Pro WX 3200

4 GB 65

2,209

0.0%

Radeon HD 8670D + HD 6670 Dual

Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB

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 Pro WX 3200 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.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Pro WX 3200: 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

✅187.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 375.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 11.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Radeon Pro WX 3200 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.
❌15.4% higher power demand at 75W vs 65W.
❌36.3% longer card at 229mm vs 168mm.

Radeon Pro WX 3200

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 75W, a 10W reduction.
✅Measures 168mm instead of 229mm, a 61mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2019 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌
33.6% HIGHER MSRP
$199 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 11.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($199 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 187.4% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 256.2% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 2,209), 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: a 12nm process instead of 14nm. That still leaves it as the safer long-term option on hardware alone.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $50 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $199, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 375.8% (52.8 vs 11.1), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Radeon Pro WX 3200

The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 2 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1082 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 65W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,209 points. Launch price was $199.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro WX 3200's 2,209 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 256.2%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 640 (Radeon Pro WX 3200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.385 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 3200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
G3D Mark Score	7,869+256%	2,209
Architecture	Turing	GCN 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	896+40%	640
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+115%	1.385 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	56+75%	32
L1 Cache	896 KB+460%	160 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
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)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the Radeon Pro WX 3200. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon Pro WX 3200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 3200). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
DirectX	12	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 3.4 (Polaris) (Radeon Pro WX 3200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) (Radeon Pro WX 3200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 3.4 (Polaris)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 6.3
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only)

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro WX 3200's 65W — a 14.3% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 3200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 3200). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 82°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
TDP	75W	65W-13%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	168mm
Height	111mm	69mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C-15%	82°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+209%	34.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon Pro WX 3200 launched at $199. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 25.1% cheaper ($50 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.1 (Radeon Pro WX 3200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 375.7% better value.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro WX 3200
MSRP	$149-25%	$199
Performance per Dollar	52.8+376%	11.1
Codename	TU117	Polaris 23
Release	April 23 2019	July 2 2019
Ranking	#323	#659

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search Radeon Pro WX 3200 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.