GeForce GTX 1650 vs MOBILITY/RADEON 9000

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2010). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 196625% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+196625%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-196625%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+700%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $49), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 128427% better value per dollar than the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+128427%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($49)

Performance Check

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 7800X3D 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

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and MOBILITY/RADEON 9000

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.

MOBILITY/RADEON 9000

The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000's 4 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 196625%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 uses TeraScale 2, both on 12 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 800 (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.12 TFLOPS (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
G3D Mark Score	7,869+196625%	4
Architecture	Turing	TeraScale 2
Process Node	12 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	896+12%	800
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+166%	1.12 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	56+40%	40
L1 Cache	896 KB+1020%	80 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.25 MB (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.1 (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000). Vulkan: 1.4 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 1.4. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
DirectX	12+48%	8.1
Vulkan	1.4	N/A
OpenGL	4.6+229%	1.4
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs N/A (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs MPEG-2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	N/A
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	MPEG-2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000's 10W — a 152.9% difference. The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0W (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000). Power connectors: None vs None. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	MOBILITY/RADEON 9000
TDP	75W	10W-87%
Recommended PSU	300W	0W-100%
Power Connector	None	None
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	70
Perf/Watt	104.9+26125%	0.4

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 launched at $0 and now averages $49. The MOBILITY/RADEON 9000 costs 34.7% less ($26 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.1 (MOBILITY/RADEON 9000) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 104800% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2010).