
Radeon Pro 5500M vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

Radeon Pro 5500M
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
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. The Radeon Pro 5500M is positioned at rank 23 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is on rank 160, so the Radeon Pro 5500M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon Pro 5500M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro 5500M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% 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 Ti with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon Pro 5500M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 Radeon Pro 5500M and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

Radeon Pro 5500M
The Radeon Pro 5500M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2019. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1450 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 85W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,730 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro 5500M scores 6,730 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design reaches 6,574 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro 5500M is built on RDNA 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on 7 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 4.454 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1450 MHz vs 1200 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,730+2% | 6,574 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+50% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.454 TFLOPS+81% | 2.458 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1450 MHz+21% | 1200 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+50% | 64 |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon Pro 5500M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design has 4 GB. The Radeon Pro 5500M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) — the Radeon Pro 5500M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 2.0 (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Decoder: VCN 2.0 vs NVDEC (4th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 2.0 | NVENC (Turing) |
| Decoder | VCN 2.0 | NVDEC (4th Gen) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro 5500M draws 85W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design's 50W — a 51.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro 5500M) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 75°C.
| Feature | Radeon Pro 5500M | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 85W | 50W-41% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 85 | 75°C-12% |
| Perf/Watt | 79.2 | 131.5+66% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















