GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 M270X

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 M270X 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 M270X: 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

✅429.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $101 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Delivers 996.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 4.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
✅Radeon R9 M270X is already obsolete for modern gaming, 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.

Radeon R9 M270X

2014

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌2014 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌
67.8% HIGHER MSRP
$250 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($250 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 429.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 553.6% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 1,204), 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 2014. 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 $101 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $250, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 996.6% (52.8 vs 4.8), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 M270X 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 M270X

The Radeon R9 M270X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 21 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 775 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,204 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R9 M270X's 1,204 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 553.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 M270X uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M270X). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.992 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M270X). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 775 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 M270X
G3D Mark Score	7,869+554%	1,204
Architecture	Turing	GCN 1.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896+40%	640
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+201%	0.992 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+115%	775 MHz
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	56+40%	40
L1 Cache	896 KB+460%	160 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 M270X leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 M270X
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 128-bit on the Radeon R9 M270X. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R9 M270X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 M270X
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 M270X's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R9 M270X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M270X). Power connectors: None vs Mobile.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 M270X
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Mobile
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+552%	16.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon R9 M270X launched at $250. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 40.4% cheaper ($101 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.8 (Radeon R9 M270X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1000% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2014).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 M270X
MSRP	$149-40%	$250
Performance per Dollar	52.8+1000%	4.8
Codename	TU117	Venus
Release	April 23 2019	March 21 2014
Ranking	#323	#819

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 M270X 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.