GeForce GTX 1650
Radeon RX Vega M GL
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX Vega M GL 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 RX Vega M GL 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 RX Vega M GL: 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
- ✅43.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $1 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 102.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 26.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
- ✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
- ✅Radeon RX Vega M GL 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.
- ❌15.4% higher power demand at 75W vs 65W.
Radeon RX Vega M GL
2018Why buy it
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 75W, a 10W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2018 hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
- ❌0.7% HIGHER MSRP$150 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 26.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($150 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
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 RX Vega M GL 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 RX Vega M GL
The Radeon RX Vega M GL is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 1 2018. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 931 MHz to 1011 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 65W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,906 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX Vega M GL's 3,906 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 101.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX Vega M GL uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,280 (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.588 TFLOPS (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1011 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+101% | 3,906 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1280+43% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+15% | 2.588 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+65% | 1011 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 80+43% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+180% | 320 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 RX Vega M GL leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX Vega M GL carries 0 MB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 100+% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 179.2 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega M GL) — a 40% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega M GL. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 1024-bit on the Radeon RX Vega M GL.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 179.2 GB/s+40% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 1024-bit+700% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 6+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (Radeon RX Vega M GL).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX Vega M GL's 65W — a 14.3% difference. The Radeon RX Vega M GL is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1W (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Power connectors: None vs Integrated. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 65W-13% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | None | Integrated |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+75% | 60.1 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon RX Vega M GL launched at $150. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 0.7% cheaper ($1 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 26.0 (Radeon RX Vega M GL) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 103.1% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2018).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+103% | 26.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | Polaris 22 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | February 1 2018 |
| Ranking | #323 | #500 |
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 RX Vega M GL
