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 with Max-Q Design

2020

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon R9 380X: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon R9 380X is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm 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.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 26.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $229 MSRP).

Radeon R9 380X

2015

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

2020

Radeon R9 380X

2015

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon R9 380X: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon R9 380X is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 26.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($229 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 26.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $229 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design better than Radeon R9 380X?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 6,309 vs 6,131 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the overall package: you are getting a newer generation, no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (50W vs 250W).

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

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2015, the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 28nm. 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?

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the smarter buy by a wide margin. GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $229 MSRP, and you are getting 2.9% higher G3D Mark. Radeon R9 380X really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

Is Radeon R9 380X still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

No, not for a fresh gaming build. Radeon R9 380X is 2015 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM, 6,131 in G3D Mark, and FSR upscaling. That is simply too far behind to be an easy modern recommendation.

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 with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Radeon R9 380X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
1080p
low	102 FPS	78 FPS
medium	87 FPS	67 FPS
high	72 FPS	54 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	35 FPS
1440p
low	89 FPS	68 FPS
medium	76 FPS	60 FPS
high	56 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	32 FPS	27 FPS
4K
low	28 FPS	25 FPS
medium	27 FPS	23 FPS
high	18 FPS	15 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon R9 380X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
1080p
low	132 FPS	133 FPS
medium	111 FPS	105 FPS
high	92 FPS	86 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	61 FPS
1440p
low	80 FPS	78 FPS
medium	63 FPS	58 FPS
high	48 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	33 FPS	31 FPS
4K
low	35 FPS	31 FPS
medium	27 FPS	23 FPS
high	21 FPS	18 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon R9 380X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
1080p
low	284 FPS	276 FPS
medium	227 FPS	221 FPS
high	189 FPS	184 FPS
ultra	142 FPS	138 FPS
1440p
low	213 FPS	207 FPS
medium	170 FPS	166 FPS
high	142 FPS	138 FPS
ultra	106 FPS	103 FPS
4K
low	142 FPS	138 FPS
medium	114 FPS	110 FPS
high	95 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	69 FPS	69 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon R9 380X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
1080p
low	144 FPS	135 FPS
medium	118 FPS	112 FPS
high	100 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	86 FPS	83 FPS
1440p
low	105 FPS	100 FPS
medium	86 FPS	83 FPS
high	73 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	61 FPS	58 FPS
4K
low	60 FPS	60 FPS
medium	47 FPS	47 FPS
high	37 FPS	37 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	26 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design Open Radeon R9 380X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design and Radeon R9 380X

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,309 points.

Radeon R9 380X

The Radeon R9 380X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 970 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,131 points. Launch price was $229.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design scores 6,309 and the Radeon R9 380X reaches 6,131 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 380X uses GCN 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 2,048 (Radeon R9 380X). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 3.973 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 380X). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 970 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
G3D Mark Score	6,309+3%	6,131
Architecture	Turing	GCN 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	2048+100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	3.973 TFLOPS+62%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz+24%	970 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	128+100%
L1 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon R9 380X relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
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 feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 106 GB/s (Radeon R9 380X) — a 5.7% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 380X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	112 GB/s+6%	106 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon R9 380X). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 380X). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 6.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,H.265,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1 (Radeon R9 380X).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 6.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	H.264,H.265,MPEG-2,MPEG-4,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon R9 380X's 250W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design) vs 500W (Radeon R9 380X). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 2x 6-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design	Radeon R9 380X
TDP	50W-80%	250W
Recommended PSU	350W-30%	500W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	2x 6-pin
Length	—	221mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	75
Perf/Watt	126.2+415%	24.5