
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Pro Vega II Duo

GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon Pro Vega II Duo
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 Pro Vega II Duo
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 78.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 1650 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-78.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+78.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ⚠️ Potential Buffer Bottleneck |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $3,500 for the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo, it costs 98% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 2519.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2519.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($3,500) |
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 Pro Vega II Duo

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 Pro Vega II Duo
The Radeon Pro Vega II Duo is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 3 2019. It features the GCN 5.1 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1400 MHz to 1720 MHz. It has 4096 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 475W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 14,018 points. Launch price was $4,399.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo's 14,018 — the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo leads by 78.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo uses GCN 5.1, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4,096 (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 14.09 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1720 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 14,018+78% |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.1 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 4096 ×2+357% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 14.09 TFLOPS ×2+372% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1720 MHz+3% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64 ×2+100% |
| TMUs | 56 | 256 ×2+357% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 1 MB+14% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Pro Vega II Duo has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 864 GB/s (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo) — a 575% advantage for the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo) — the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 864 GB/s+575% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 8.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 8+167% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 4.1 (2x) (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 7.2 (2x). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 4.1 (2x) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 7.2 (2x) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo's 475W — a 145.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1W (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo). Power connectors: None vs Integrated. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 4 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-84% | 475W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | None | Integrated |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 120mm |
| Slots | 2-50% | 4 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+256% | 29.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon Pro Vega II Duo launched at $4399 and now averages $3500. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 97.9% less ($3425 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega II Duo) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 2522.5% better value.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro Vega II Duo |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-97% | $4399 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-98% | $3500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+2523% | 4.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | Vega 20 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | June 3 2019 |
| Ranking | #323 | #170 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











