GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R7 340

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 R7 340

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

748%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

718%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

710%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

709%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

707%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

703%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

695%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

692%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

686%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

684%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

675%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

674%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

662%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

661%

#85

Radeon Ryzen 7 6800U

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

97%

#86

Radeon Ryzen 5 6600U

MSRP: $350|Avg: $350

94%

#115

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

825%

#130

Radeon R7 340

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

100%

#133

Radeon HD 6750

MSRP: $109|Avg: $109

99%

#135

Radeon R5 240

MSRP: $59|Avg: $10

98%

#136

Radeon HD 8570

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

97%

#137

Radeon R5 340

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

97%

#139

GeForce GT 730

MSRP: $89|Avg: $45

95%

#140

Radeon HD 8400E

MSRP: $30|Avg: $5

95%

#142

Radeon HD 8400

MSRP: $30|Avg: $5

93%

#143

Radeon HD 5750

MSRP: $130|Avg: $25

93%

#145

Radeon HD 8330E

MSRP: $30|Avg: $5

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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 R7 340 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 719.7% 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 R7 340.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+719.7%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-719.7%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / 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	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $25), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 173.2% better value per dollar than the Radeon R7 340.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+173.2%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($25)

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 R7 340 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R7 340

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 R7 340

The Radeon R7 340 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 18 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 975 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 960 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R7 340's 960 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 719.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R7 340 uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,024 (Radeon R7 340). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.997 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 340). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 975 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
G3D Mark Score	7,869+720%	960
Architecture	Turing	GCN 1.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1024+14%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+49%	1.997 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+71%	975 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	64+14%
L1 Cache	896 KB+250%	256 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
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 R7 340 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 0.5 MB (Radeon R7 340) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
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+100%	0.5 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R7 340's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 300W (Radeon R7 340). Power connectors: None vs None.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 340
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W	300W
Power Connector	None	None
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+993%	9.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon R7 340 launched at $99 and now averages $25. The Radeon R7 340 costs 66.7% less ($50 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 38.4 (Radeon R7 340) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 173.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).