GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX Vega 64

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

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 RX Vega 64 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 77.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 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 Vega 64
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-77.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+77.3%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 5.0 (2017−2020))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	Standard Size (267mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Radeon RX Vega 64 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $85 (vs $75), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 56.4% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 1650.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+56.4%)
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($85)

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 Vega 64 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX Vega 64

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 Vega 64

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 7 2017. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1247 MHz to 1546 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 295W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,949 points. Launch price was $499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX Vega 64's 13,949 — the Radeon RX Vega 64 leads by 77.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX Vega 64 uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4,096 (Radeon RX Vega 64). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.66 TFLOPS (Radeon RX Vega 64). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1546 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
G3D Mark Score	7,869	13,949+77%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	896	4096+357%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	12.66 TFLOPS+324%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+8%	1546 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	256+357%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	1 MB+14%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
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 Vega 64 has 8 GB. The Radeon RX Vega 64 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 484 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega 64) — a 278.1% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega 64. Bus width: 128-bit vs 2048-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon RX Vega 64) — the Radeon RX Vega 64 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	HBM2
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	484 GB/s+278%
Bus Width	128-bit	2048-bit+1500%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Radeon RX Vega 64). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 4.0 (Radeon RX Vega 64). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon RX Vega 64).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 7.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX Vega 64's 295W — a 118.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 750W (Radeon RX Vega 64). Power connectors: None vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX Vega 64
TDP	75W-75%	295W
Recommended PSU	300W-60%	750W
Power Connector	None	2x 8-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+122%	47.3

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon RX Vega 64 launched at $499 and now averages $85. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 11.8% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 164.1 (Radeon RX Vega 64) — the Radeon RX Vega 64 offers 56.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).