GeForce GTX 1650
Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire Performance Spectrum
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 M290X Crossfire 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire: 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
2019Why buy it
- ✅62.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $651 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 604.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 7.5 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $800 MSRP).
- ✅Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 200W, a 125W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
- ❌22800% longer card at 229mm vs 1mm.
Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
2014Why buy it
- ✅Measures 1mm instead of 229mm, a 228mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌2014 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
- ❌436.9% HIGHER MSRP$800 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 7.5 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($800 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌166.7% higher power demand at 200W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire 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 M290X Crossfire
The Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 1 2014. It features the GCN architecture. The core clock ranges from 850 MHz to 900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,000 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire's 6,000 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 31.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire uses GCN, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 900 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+31% | 6,000 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 2560+186% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+85% | 900 MHz |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| 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 307.2 GB/s (Dual) (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire) — a 140% advantage for the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 512-bit (Dual) on the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 307.2 GB/s (Dual)+140% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 512-bit (Dual)+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 3.1.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 3.1 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire's 200W — a 90.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 229mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-63% | 200W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | 1mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+250% | 30.0 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire launched at $800. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 81.4% cheaper ($651 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 7.5 (Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 604% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-81% | $800 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+604% | 7.5 |
| Codename | TU117 | Neptune CF |
| Release | April 23 2019 | March 1 2014 |
| Ranking | #323 | #348 |
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.
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire
