GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX 9070
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Radeon RX 9070
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 Radeon RX 9070
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX 9070 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Radeon RX 9070 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon RX 9070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 222.5% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (16 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-222.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+222.5%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🏆Elite Architecture (RDNA 4.0 (2025) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ FSR 3 / AFMF Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $550 for the Radeon RX 9070, it costs 86% less. While it maintains significantly lower raw performance, this results in a 127.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+127.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($550) |
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 RX 9070
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 9070
The Radeon RX 9070 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 6 2025. It features the RDNA 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1330 MHz to 2520 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 56 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 25,380 points. Launch price was $549.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 9070's 25,380 — the Radeon RX 9070 leads by 222.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 9070 uses RDNA 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,584 (Radeon RX 9070). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 36.13 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 9070). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2520 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 25,380+223% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 4.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 3584+300% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 36.13 TFLOPS+1111% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2520 MHz+51% |
| ROPs | 32 | 128+300% |
| TMUs | 56 | 224+300% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 8 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 RX 9070 has 16 GB. The Radeon RX 9070 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 640 GB/s (Radeon RX 9070) — a 400% advantage for the Radeon RX 9070. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8 MB (Radeon RX 9070) — the Radeon RX 9070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 640 GB/s+400% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 8 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Radeon RX 9070). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate |
| 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 Dual Media Engine (Radeon RX 9070). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Dual Media Engine. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,AV1 (Radeon RX 9070).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Dual Media Engine |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Dual Media Engine |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 9070's 220W — a 98.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (Radeon RX 9070). Power connectors: None vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-66% | 220W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 110mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 115.4+10% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon RX 9070 launched at $549 and now averages $550. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 86.4% less ($475 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 46.1 (Radeon RX 9070) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 127.5% better value. The Radeon RX 9070 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 9070 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-73% | $549 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-86% | $550 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+128% | 46.1 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 48 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | March 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #323 | #39 |
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 RX 9070
