GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX 780

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 RX 780

#62

GeForce RTX 2080 (móvel)

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $350

98%

#285

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

707%

#287

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

641%

#288

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

639%

#292

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

581%

#293

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

578%

#296

Radeon RX 780

MSRP: $499|Avg: $721

100%

#299

GeForce 940MX

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

98%

#300

GeForce MX130

MSRP: $120|Avg: $50

98%

#301

Arc Graphics 130V

MSRP: $300|Avg: $250

98%

#302

Radeon R5 430

MSRP: $59|Avg: $50

98%

#303

GeForce MX150

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

98%

#306

GeForce MX450

MSRP: $250|Avg: $200

97%

#307

Arc Graphics 140V

MSRP: $350|Avg: $300

96%

#308

Radeon R7 A8-8650

MSRP: $49|Avg: $20

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.8% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX 780.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+2.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.8%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🏆Elite Architecture (RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) / 5nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	✨ FSR 3 / AFMF Support
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 $721 for the Radeon RX 780, it costs 90% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 887.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+887.8%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($721)

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 RX 780 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 780

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 RX 780

The Radeon RX 780 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 11 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2335 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 180W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 60 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,658 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 and the Radeon RX 780 reaches 7,658 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 780 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,840 (Radeon RX 780). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 35.87 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 780). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2335 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
G3D Mark Score	7,869+3%	7,658
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	5 nm
Shading Units	896	3840+329%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	35.87 TFLOPS+1102%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2335 MHz+40%
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	56	240+329%
L1 Cache	896 KB+17%	768 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 780 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Native)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon RX 780) — the Radeon RX 780 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	System
Bus Width	128-bit	System
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_2) (Radeon RX 780). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
DirectX	12	12 (12_2)
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs RDNA 3 Dual Media Engine (Radeon RX 780). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon RX 780).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	RDNA 3 Dual Media Engine
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	VCN 4.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 780's 180W — a 82.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon RX 780). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
TDP	75W-58%	180W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+147%	42.5

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon RX 780 launched at $499 and now averages $721. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 89.6% less ($646 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.6 (Radeon RX 780) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 889.6% better value. The Radeon RX 780 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2019).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 780
MSRP	$149-70%	$499
Avg Price (30d)	$75-90%	$721
Performance per Dollar	104.9+890%	10.6
Codename	TU117	Navi 32
Release	April 23 2019	September 11 2024
Ranking	#323	#131