GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R1E
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Radeon R1E
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
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2514.3% 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 Radeon R1E.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2514.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2514.3%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (5nm) |
| 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 1608% better value per dollar than the Radeon R1E.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1608%) | ❌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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R1E
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 R1E
The Radeon R1E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 400 MHz to 2200 MHz. It has 128 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 2 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 301 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R1E's 301 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 2514.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R1E uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 128 (Radeon R1E). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5632 TFLOPS (Radeon R1E). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2200 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+2514% | 301 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+600% | 128 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+430% | 0.5632 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2200 MHz+32% |
| ROPs | 32+700% | 4 |
| TMUs | 56+600% | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+2700% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| 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 R1E 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 2 MB (Radeon R1E) — the Radeon R1E has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (Radeon R1E). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.0. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+40% | 1.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 2.0 (Radeon R1E). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 4.2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,HEVC (Radeon R1E).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCE 2.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R1E's 15W — a 133.3% difference. The Radeon R1E is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R1E). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 15W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+422% | 20.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon R1E launched at $0 and now averages $49. The Radeon R1E costs 34.7% less ($26 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6.1 (Radeon R1E) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1619.7% better value. The Radeon R1E is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R1E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75 | $49-35% |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+1620% | 6.1 |
| Codename | TU117 | Dragon Range |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 3 2023 |
| Ranking | #323 | #843 |
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 R1E
