GeForce GTX 1650 vs RADEON 9200 SE

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 RADEON 9200 SE

#732

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

108570%

#734

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

98420%

#735

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

98160%

#739

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

89260%

#740

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

88650%

#742

RADEON 9200 SE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $15

100%

#743

RADEON 9000

MSRP: $49|Avg: $20

100%

#744

MOBILITY RADEON 7500

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

80%

#745

MOBILITY RADEON 9000

MSRP: $50|Avg: $5

60%

#746

MOBILITY RADEON 9200

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

60%

#747

GeForce4 MX 420

MSRP: $99|Avg: $10

50%

#748

RADEON 9250

MSRP: $79|Avg: $25

40%

#749

RADEON 9200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

40%

#750

RADEON 7200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

30%

#751

GeForce4 MX 440

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

30%

#752

GeForce 256

MSRP: $199|Avg: $20

30%

#753

GeForce2 MX/MX 400

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

30%

#754

GeForce2 MX

MSRP: $129|Avg: $49

20%

#755

GeForce3

MSRP: $499|Avg: $49

10%

#756

GeForce4 440

MSRP: $469|Avg: $49

10%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The RADEON 9200 SE is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The RADEON 9200 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 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 262200% higher G3D Mark score and 1500% more VRAM (4 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9200 SE.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+262200%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-262200%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+1500%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $15), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 52360% better value per dollar than the RADEON 9200 SE.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+52360%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($15)

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

RADEON 9200 SE Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and RADEON 9200 SE

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 9200 SE

The RADEON 9200 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the RADEON 9200 SE's 3 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 262200%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the RADEON 9200 SE uses RDNA 3.5, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,560 (RADEON 9200 SE). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9200 SE). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2900 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
G3D Mark Score	7,869+262200%	3
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.5
Process Node	12 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	896	2560+186%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	14.85 TFLOPS+398%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2900 MHz+74%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	160+186%
L2 Cache	1 MB	8 MB+700%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
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 9200 SE has 256 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1500% 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 8 MB (RADEON 9200 SE) — the RADEON 9200 SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+1500%	0.25 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	8 MB+700%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.1 (RADEON 9200 SE). Vulkan: 1.4 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
DirectX	12+48%	8.1
Vulkan	1.4	N/A
OpenGL	4.6+254%	1.3
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs None (RADEON 9200 SE). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs None. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (RADEON 9200 SE).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	None
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	None
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the RADEON 9200 SE's 55W — a 30.8% difference. The RADEON 9200 SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (RADEON 9200 SE). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 60.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RADEON 9200 SE
TDP	75W	55W-27%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	229mm	168mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C	60-14%
Perf/Watt	104.9+104800%	0.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the RADEON 9200 SE launched at $30 and now averages $15. The RADEON 9200 SE costs 80% less ($60 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.2 (RADEON 9200 SE) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 52350% better value. The RADEON 9200 SE is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).