
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon Pro WX 4130
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Why buy it
- ✅+316.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $151 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 738.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 6.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro WX 4130: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro WX 4130 is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.
Radeon Pro WX 4130
2017Why buy it
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (1,890 vs 7,869).
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌101.3% HIGHER MSRP$300 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 6.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon Pro WX 4130
2017Why buy it
- ✅+316.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $151 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 738.3% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 6.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $300 MSRP).
- ✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro WX 4130: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro WX 4130 is already obsolete for modern gaming.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (1,890 vs 7,869).
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌101.3% HIGHER MSRP$300 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 6.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($300 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon Pro WX 4130?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is Radeon Pro WX 4130 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 50 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 33 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 11 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 34 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 21 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 11 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 6 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 11 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 7 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 4 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 3 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 37 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 26 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 16 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 31 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 20 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 12 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 9 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 9 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 6 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 5 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 3 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 85 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 68 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 64 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 51 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 34 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 28 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 21 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 85 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 68 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 43 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 64 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 51 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 32 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 43 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 34 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 28 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 21 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon Pro WX 4130

GeForce GTX 1650
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 4130
Radeon Pro WX 4130
The Radeon Pro WX 4130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 1 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1002 MHz to 1053 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,890 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro WX 4130's 1,890 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 316.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 640 (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.348 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1053 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+316% | 1,890 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+40% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+121% | 1.348 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+58% | 1053 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 56+40% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+460% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1650 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro WX 4130 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| 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 (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 4130).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro WX 4130's 50W — a 40% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 4130 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 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-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+178% | 37.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 launched at $300. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 50.3% less ($151 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6.3 (Radeon Pro WX 4130) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 738.1% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-50% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+738% | 6.3 |
| Codename | TU117 | Baffin |
| Release | April 23 2019 | March 1 2017 |
| Ranking | #323 | #697 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













