GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R7 A10-7800

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 R7 A10-7800 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 R7 A10-7800: 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

✅309.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $6 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $155 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1006.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 4.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $155 MSRP).
✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
✅Draws 75W instead of 180W, a 105W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

Radeon R7 A10-7800

2024

Why buy it

✅Better long-term bet: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 5nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

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.
❌
4% HIGHER MSRP
$155 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($155 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌140% higher power demand at 180W vs 75W.

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 309.8% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 963.4% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 740), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon R7 A10-7800 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 5nm process instead of 12nm, 60 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2024 generation instead of 2019. That gives it the more rounded hardware package for newer games.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $6 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $155, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 1006.2% (52.8 vs 4.8), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GeForce GTX 1650 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Radeon R7 A10-7800 has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R7 A10-7800 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 R7 A10-7800

The Radeon R7 A10-7800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 11 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2335 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 60 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 740 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R7 A10-7800's 740 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 963.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R7 A10-7800 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,840 (Radeon R7 A10-7800). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 35.87 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A10-7800). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2335 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 A10-7800
G3D Mark Score	7,869+963%	740
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	5 nm
Shading Units	896	3840+329%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	35.87 TFLOPS+1102%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2335 MHz+40%
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	56	240+329%
L1 Cache	896 KB+17%	768 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R7 A10-7800 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 A10-7800
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 R7 A10-7800 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 128-bit on the Radeon R7 A10-7800. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon R7 A10-7800) — the Radeon R7 A10-7800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 A10-7800
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R7 A10-7800's 180W — a 82.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R7 A10-7800). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 A10-7800
TDP	75W-58%	180W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+2459%	4.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon R7 A10-7800 launched at $155. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 3.9% cheaper ($6 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.8 (Radeon R7 A10-7800) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1000% better value. The newer card here is Radeon R7 A10-7800 (2024 vs 2019).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 A10-7800
MSRP	$149-4%	$155
Performance per Dollar	52.8+1000%	4.8
Codename	TU117	Navi 32
Release	April 23 2019	September 11 2024
Ranking	#323	#131

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search Radeon R7 A10-7800 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.