GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R7 M270

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 M270

#599

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

4208%

#601

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

3815%

#602

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

3805%

#606

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

3460%

#607

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

3436%

#609

Radeon R7 M270

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#610

GeForce 9800 GTX

MSRP: $299|Avg: $30

100%

#611

Mobility Radeon HD 5850

MSRP: $299|Avg: $30

99%

#612

Seria Mobility Radeon HD 3400

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

99%

#614

GeForce 205

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

98%

#615

GeForce 9600 GSO

MSRP: $129|Avg: $25

97%

#616

GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+

MSRP: $229|Avg: $40

97%

#617

GeForce 9400

MSRP: $59|Avg: $15

97%

#618

GeForce 7350 LE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $10

96%

#620

Mobility Radeon HD 3850

MSRP: $150|Avg: $15

95%

#621

Mobility Radeon HD 4870

MSRP: $299|Avg: $20

93%

#622

GeForce 9800M GT

MSRP: $160|Avg: $5

92%

#623

Radeon HD 7600G + HD 7400M Dual

MSRP: $140|Avg: $35

91%

#624

Radeon HD 8550G + 8670M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

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 M270 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 915.4% 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 M270.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+915.4%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-915.4%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019))
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. Priced at $75 versus $300 for the Radeon R7 M270, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 3961.4% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+3961.4%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)

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 M270 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R7 M270

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 M270

The Radeon R7 M270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 11 2014. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 940 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 775 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R7 M270's 775 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 915.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R7 M270 uses GCN 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (Radeon R7 M270). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.7219 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 M270). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 940 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
G3D Mark Score	7,869+915%	775
Architecture	Turing	GCN 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+313%	0.7219 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+77%	940 MHz
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	56+133%	24
L1 Cache	896 KB+833%	96 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
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 M270 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 R7 M270) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
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 (11_1) (Radeon R7 M270). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
DirectX	12	12 (11_1)
Vulkan	1.4+17%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 M270). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,DivX (Radeon R7 M270).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 1.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 4.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,DivX

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R7 M270's 75W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R7 M270 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon R7 M270). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R7 M270
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Mobile
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+918%	10.3

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon R7 M270 launched at $300 and now averages $300. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 75% less ($225 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.6 (Radeon R7 M270) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 3934.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).