
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 6300
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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.
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
2019Why buy it
- ✅+47.9% higher PassMark G3D performance.
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌148.3% HIGHER MSRP$149 MSRPvs$60 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 52.8 vs 88.7 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
- ❌114.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 35W.
Radeon RX 6300
2022Why buy it
- ✅Costs $89 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 67.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 88.7 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($60 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 75W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,319 vs 7,869).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon RX 6300
2022Why buy it
- ✅+47.9% higher PassMark G3D performance.
Why buy it
- ✅Costs $89 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 67.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 88.7 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($60 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 75W, a 40W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌148.3% HIGHER MSRP$149 MSRPvs$60 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 52.8 vs 88.7 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
- ❌114.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 35W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,319 vs 7,869).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon RX 6300?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon RX 6300 make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650?
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 129 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 98 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 73 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 118 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 99 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 83 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 62 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 49 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 46 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 34 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 30 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 165 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 129 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 96 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 62 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 107 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 83 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 61 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 42 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 54 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 32 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 20 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 239 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 160 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 120 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 180 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 144 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 90 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 80 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 60 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 239 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 191 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 160 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 120 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 180 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 144 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 120 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 90 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 108 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 70 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 54 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 6300

GeForce GTX 1650
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 6300
Radeon RX 6300
The Radeon RX 6300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,319 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 6300's 5,319 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 47.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6300 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 768 (Radeon RX 6300). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2400 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+48% | 5,319 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+17% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 3.686 TFLOPS+24% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2400 MHz+44% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56+17% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+250% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300 is support for FSR Frame Generation + AFMF. 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 6300 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR 3 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR Frame Generation + AFMF |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300) — a 100% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 32-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s+100% | 64 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+300% | 32-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12_2 (Radeon RX 6300). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12_2 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6300). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 3.0.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6300's 35W — a 72.7% difference. The Radeon RX 6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 300W (Radeon RX 6300). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 160mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 35W-53% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 300W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 160mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 152.0+45% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon RX 6300 launched at $60. The Radeon RX 6300 costs 59.7% less ($89 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 88.7 (Radeon RX 6300) — the Radeon RX 6300 offers 68% better value. The Radeon RX 6300 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $60-60% |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8 | 88.7+68% |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #379 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













