GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon 840M
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Radeon 840M
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.
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Radeon 840M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 106.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon 840M.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+106.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-106.9%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | RDNA 3+ (2024) (4nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon 840M
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 840M
The Radeon 840M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 2 2024. It features the RDNA 3+ architecture. The boost clock speed is 2900 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,803 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon 840M's 3,803 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 106.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon 840M uses RDNA 3+, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 256 (Radeon 840M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2900 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+107% | 3,803 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 3+ |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+250% | 256 |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2900 MHz+74% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Radeon 840M has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs System.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2) (Radeon 840M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon 840M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9 (Radeon 840M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 4.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,AV1,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon 840M's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The Radeon 840M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon 840M). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 90.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 30W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-22% | 90 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 126.8+21% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 840M is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon 840M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | Krackan Point |
| Release | April 23 2019 | June 2 2024 |
| Ranking | #323 | #516 |
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 840M
