
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon Pro WX 4130
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 WX 4130
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. 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 Radeon Pro WX 4130 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 316.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon Pro WX 4130.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+316.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-316.3%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| 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. Priced at $75 versus $100 for the Radeon Pro WX 4130, it costs 25% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 455.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+455.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
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 WX 4130

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 WX 4130
The Radeon Pro WX 4130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 1 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1002 MHz to 1053 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,890 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro WX 4130's 1,890 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 316.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 640 (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.348 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1053 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+316% | 1,890 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+40% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+121% | 1.348 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+58% | 1053 MHz |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 56+40% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+460% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_0) |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 4130).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 3.4 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 6.3 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro WX 4130's 50W — a 40% difference. The Radeon Pro WX 4130 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 4130). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 50W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+178% | 37.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon Pro WX 4130 launched at $300 and now averages $100. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 25% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 18.9 (Radeon Pro WX 4130) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 455% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon Pro WX 4130 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-50% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-25% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+455% | 18.9 |
| Codename | TU117 | Baffin |
| Release | April 23 2019 | March 1 2017 |
| Ranking | #323 | #697 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.

















