GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R5 M240

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 R5 M240

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

1534%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1473%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

1456%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1454%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1451%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

1442%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

1424%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1419%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1406%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

1402%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

1385%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1382%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

1357%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1356%

#99

Radeon Ryzen 7 4700U

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

96%

#223

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

1691%

#238

Radeon R5 M240

MSRP: $100|Avg: $30

100%

#239

Radeon HD 4350

MSRP: $35|Avg: $10

100%

#240

RADEON HD 6350

MSRP: $30|Avg: $30

99%

#241

Radeon HD 4870

MSRP: $299|Avg: $25

98%

#244

Radeon HD 7560D

MSRP: $101|Avg: $15

95%

#246

GeForce GTS 250

MSRP: $129|Avg: $20

93%

#248

GeForce G100

MSRP: $40|Avg: $5

93%

#249

Radeon R7 M265

MSRP: $130|Avg: $30

91%

#250

Radeon HD 8250

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

90%

#251

Radeon HD 3300

MSRP: $30|Avg: $5

89%

#253

Radeon R5 220

MSRP: $35|Avg: $15

89%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2013). 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 R5 M240 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 1563.6% 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 R5 M240.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1563.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1563.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))
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	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $30), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 565.5% better value per dollar than the Radeon R5 M240.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+565.5%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($30)

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 R5 M240 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R5 M240

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 R5 M240

The Radeon R5 M240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 780 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 473 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R5 M240's 473 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 1563.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R5 M240 uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 320 (Radeon R5 M240). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.448 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 M240). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 780 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
G3D Mark Score	7,869+1564%	473
Architecture	Turing	GCN 1.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896+180%	320
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+566%	0.448 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+113%	780 MHz
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	56+180%	20
L1 Cache	896 KB+1020%	80 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
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 R5 M240 has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon R5 M240) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (Radeon R5 M240). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
DirectX	12	12
Max Displays	3	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R5 M240). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 4.2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 1.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 4.2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R5 M240's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The Radeon R5 M240 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R5 M240). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 229mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R5 M240
TDP	75W	30W-60%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Mobile
Length	229mm	1mm
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+564%	15.8

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon R5 M240 launched at $100 and now averages $30. The Radeon R5 M240 costs 60% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 15.8 (Radeon R5 M240) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 563.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).