GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 290X

CPU

GPU

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

GTX family

·······

Buy on Amazon

Radeon R9 290X

2013Boost: 947 MHz

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 290X Performance Spectrum

GeForce GTX 1650

4 GB 75

7,869

0.0%

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 R9 290X

4 GB 350

8,426

+7.1%

Radeon R9 Nano

Radeon HD 6970M Crossfire

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

Radeon RX 7800 XT

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 R9 290X 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 R9 290X: 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

✅Costs $400 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Delivers 244.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 15.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $549 MSRP).
✅Radeon R9 290X is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
✅Draws 75W instead of 350W, a 275W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 275mm, a 46mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon R9 290X across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

Radeon R9 290X

2013

Why buy it

✅9.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌2013 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
❌
268.5% HIGHER MSRP
$549 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 15.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($549 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌366.7% higher power demand at 350W vs 75W.
❌20.1% longer card at 275mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

Radeon R9 290X is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 9.9% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 7.1% in PassMark G3D (8,426 vs 7,869), 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 28nm and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2013. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $400 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $549, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 244.1% (52.8 vs 15.3), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. Radeon R9 290X still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 290X 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 R9 290X

The Radeon R9 290X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 24 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2816 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 350W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,426 points. Launch price was $549.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R9 290X's 8,426 — the Radeon R9 290X leads by 7.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 290X uses GCN 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,816 (Radeon R9 290X). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.632 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 290X). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 947 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
G3D Mark Score	7,869	8,426+7%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	2816+214%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	5.632 TFLOPS+89%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+76%	947 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	176+214%
L1 Cache	896 KB+27%	704 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 290X leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
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 bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 320 GB/s (Radeon R9 290X) — a 150% advantage for the Radeon R9 290X. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 512-bit on the Radeon R9 290X.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	320 GB/s+150%
Bus Width	128-bit	512-bit+300%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 290X). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
DirectX	12	12.0
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	6+100%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 290X). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon R9 290X).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 2.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 4.2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 290X's 350W — a 129.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 750W (Radeon R9 290X). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 275mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 95°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
TDP	75W-79%	350W
Recommended PSU	300W-60%	750W
Power Connector	None	6-pin + 8-pin
Length	229mm	275mm
Height	111mm	109mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-26%	95°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+335%	24.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon R9 290X launched at $549. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 72.9% cheaper ($400 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 15.3 (Radeon R9 290X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 245.1% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2013).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 290X
MSRP	$149-73%	$549
Performance per Dollar	52.8+245%	15.3
Codename	TU117	Hawaii
Release	April 23 2019	October 24 2013
Ranking	#323	#342

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 290X 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.