
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U
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
- ✅131.8% more average FPS across 40 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $101 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 754% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 6.2 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U
2020Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 40 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 512 MB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌67.8% HIGHER MSRP$250 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 6.2 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($250 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U
2020Why buy it
- ✅131.8% more average FPS across 40 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $101 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 754% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 6.2 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $250 MSRP).
- ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 40 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 512 MB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌67.8% HIGHER MSRP$250 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 6.2 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($250 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U?
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 Ryzen 3 5300U 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 Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 52 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 35 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 17 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 52 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 35 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 22 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 16 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 52 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 35 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 17 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 70 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 52 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 26 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 35 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 28 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 23 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 17 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U

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 Ryzen 3 5300U
Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U
The Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U 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: 1,546 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U's 1,546 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 409%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U uses RDNA 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,408 (Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.632 TFLOPS (Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1645 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+409% | 1,546 |
| 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)
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 Ryzen 3 5300U relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| 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 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.5 MB (Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U) — the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U). Power connectors: None vs None.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-25% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | None |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+577% | 15.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U launched at $250. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 40.4% less ($101 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6.2 (Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 751.6% better value. The Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Ryzen 3 5300U |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-40% | $250 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+752% | 6.2 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 14 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | May 28 2020 |
| Ranking | #323 | #336 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.














