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

2019

Why buy it

✅+41.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 89.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon R9 285 / 380: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon R9 285 / 380 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.

Radeon R9 285 / 380

2014

Why buy it

✅Measures 221mm instead of 229mm, a 8mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,550 vs 7,869).
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
33.6% HIGHER MSRP
$199 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($199 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon R9 285 / 380

2014

Why buy it

✅+41.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $50 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅Delivers 89.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $199 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon R9 285 / 380: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon R9 285 / 380 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Why buy it

✅Measures 221mm instead of 229mm, a 8mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,550 vs 7,869).
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2014-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
33.6% HIGHER MSRP
$199 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($199 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon R9 285 / 380?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 7,869 vs 5,550 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon R9 285 / 380 is a 2014 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2019 generation instead of 2014, 41.8% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 4 GB instead of 2 GB, and the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 1650 is about $50 cheaper on MSRP at $149 MSRP versus $199 MSRP, and you are getting 41.8% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 89.4%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is Radeon R9 285 / 380 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. Radeon R9 285 / 380 is still a strong modern gaming GPU: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It remains a good buy when you can get it meaningfully cheaper than the alternative around $199 MSRP, even if GeForce GTX 1650 is still the cleaner recommendation on overall value today.

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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 285 / 380 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
1080p
low	94 FPS	80 FPS
medium	83 FPS	65 FPS
high	70 FPS	52 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	34 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	67 FPS
medium	74 FPS	56 FPS
high	60 FPS	40 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	25 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	25 FPS
medium	39 FPS	23 FPS
high	27 FPS	15 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon R9 285 / 380

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
1080p
low	136 FPS	138 FPS
medium	113 FPS	105 FPS
high	94 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	56 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	78 FPS
medium	62 FPS	55 FPS
high	44 FPS	41 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	29 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	28 FPS
medium	27 FPS	20 FPS
high	21 FPS	16 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	11 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon R9 285 / 380

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
1080p
low	323 FPS	250 FPS
medium	283 FPS	200 FPS
high	205 FPS	166 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	125 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	187 FPS
medium	202 FPS	150 FPS
high	151 FPS	125 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	94 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	125 FPS
medium	117 FPS	100 FPS
high	79 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	62 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon R9 285 / 380

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
1080p
low	261 FPS	172 FPS
medium	211 FPS	141 FPS
high	191 FPS	125 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	98 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	123 FPS
medium	158 FPS	103 FPS
high	135 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	66 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	72 FPS
medium	74 FPS	56 FPS
high	65 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	30 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon R9 285 / 380

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R9 285 / 380

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 R9 285 / 380

The Radeon R9 285 / 380 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 2 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 918 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,550 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R9 285 / 380's 5,550 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 41.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 285 / 380 uses GCN 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,792 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.29 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 285 / 380).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
G3D Mark Score	7,869+42%	5,550
Architecture	Turing	GCN 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1792+100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	3.29 TFLOPS+10%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	112+100%
L1 Cache	896 KB+100%	448 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 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 R9 285 / 380 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
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 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 285 / 380 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 285 / 380) — a 37.5% advantage for the Radeon R9 285 / 380. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 285 / 380) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	176 GB/s+38%
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
DirectX	12	12
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 3.0 (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 5.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon R9 285 / 380).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 5.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 285 / 380's 190W — a 86.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Radeon R9 285 / 380). Power connectors: None vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 221mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 285 / 380
TDP	75W-61%	190W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	2x 6-pin
Length	229mm	221mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+259%	29.2

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 285 / 380 launched at $199. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 25.1% less ($50 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 27.9 (Radeon R9 285 / 380) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 89.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).