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

✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 3 GB).
✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation (2023).
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌
15.5% HIGHER MSRP
$149 MSRPvs$129 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 52.8 vs 59.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $129 MSRP).
❌27.2% longer card at 229mm vs 180mm.

Radeon RX 5300

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Delivers 11.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 59.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation (2023).
✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Measures 180mm instead of 229mm, a 49mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 3 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon RX 5300

2020

Why buy it

✅33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 3 GB).
✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Costs $20 less on MSRP ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Delivers 11.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 59.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($129 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation (2023).
✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Measures 180mm instead of 229mm, a 49mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation (2023).
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌
15.5% HIGHER MSRP
$149 MSRPvs$129 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 52.8 vs 59.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $129 MSRP).
❌27.2% longer card at 229mm vs 180mm.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 3 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon RX 5300?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 7,869 vs 7,606 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 1650 is the overall package: you are getting no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (75W vs 100W).

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

Radeon RX 5300 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2019, better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack and better frame-generation support with FSR Frame Generation (2023) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 7nm process instead of 12nm. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

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

Radeon RX 5300 can still make sense if you find it at the right price, especially around $129 MSRP. GeForce GTX 1650 is still the smarter buy for most people, though, because the raw performance is close while the overall package is cleaner. GeForce GTX 1650 is about 15.5% more expensive on MSRP at $149 MSRP versus $129 MSRP, and you are getting 3.5% higher G3D Mark. Radeon RX 5300 is the newer 2020 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon RX 5300 make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon RX 5300 is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, future-proofing, and staying closer to $129 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 1650. The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 1650 currently gives you 3.5% higher G3D Mark. Radeon RX 5300 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium.

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 RX 5300 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
1080p
low	94 FPS	114 FPS
medium	83 FPS	101 FPS
high	70 FPS	80 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	59 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	101 FPS
medium	74 FPS	87 FPS
high	60 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	48 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	43 FPS
medium	39 FPS	40 FPS
high	27 FPS	27 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	23 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 5300

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
1080p
low	136 FPS	130 FPS
medium	113 FPS	96 FPS
high	94 FPS	68 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	44 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	84 FPS
medium	62 FPS	56 FPS
high	44 FPS	42 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	30 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	37 FPS
medium	27 FPS	26 FPS
high	21 FPS	21 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	15 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 5300

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
1080p
low	323 FPS	342 FPS
medium	283 FPS	274 FPS
high	205 FPS	228 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	171 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	257 FPS
medium	202 FPS	205 FPS
high	151 FPS	171 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	128 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	171 FPS
medium	117 FPS	137 FPS
high	79 FPS	114 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	86 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 5300

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
1080p
low	261 FPS	268 FPS
medium	211 FPS	211 FPS
high	191 FPS	182 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	154 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	204 FPS
medium	158 FPS	158 FPS
high	135 FPS	129 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	105 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	99 FPS
medium	74 FPS	77 FPS
high	65 FPS	66 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	52 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 5300

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 5300

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 RX 5300

The Radeon RX 5300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 28 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1327 MHz to 1645 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,606 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 and the Radeon RX 5300 reaches 7,606 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 5300 uses RDNA 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,408 (Radeon RX 5300). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.632 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 5300). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1645 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
G3D Mark Score	7,869+3%	7,606
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 1.0
Process Node	12 nm	7 nm
Shading Units	896	1408+57%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	4.632 TFLOPS+55%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+1%	1645 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	88+57%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 5300 is support for FSR Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.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 RX 5300 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR Frame Generation
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 RX 5300 has 3 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 168 GB/s (Radeon RX 5300) — a 31.3% advantage for the Radeon RX 5300. Bus width: 128-bit vs 96-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.5 MB (Radeon RX 5300) — the Radeon RX 5300 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+33%	3 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	168 GB/s+31%
Bus Width	128-bit+33%	96-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Radeon RX 5300). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon RX 5300). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 2.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon RX 5300).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCN 2.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	VCN 2.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 5300's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon RX 5300). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 180mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 5300
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	8-pin
Length	229mm	180mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-7%	75°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+38%	76.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon RX 5300 launched at $129. The Radeon RX 5300 costs 13.4% less ($20 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 59.0 (Radeon RX 5300) — the Radeon RX 5300 offers 11.7% better value. The Radeon RX 5300 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).