Radeon PRO W7900 vs GeForce GTX 1650
Radeon PRO W7900
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650
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 Radeon PRO W7900
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon PRO W7900 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 258.5% higher G3D Mark score and 1100% more VRAM (48 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 | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+258.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-258.5%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) / 5nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (48 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $3,500 for the Radeon PRO W7900, it costs 98% less. While it maintains significantly lower raw performance, this results in a 1201.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1201.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($3,500) | ✅More affordable ($75) |
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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon PRO W7900 and GeForce GTX 1650
Radeon PRO W7900
The Radeon PRO W7900 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 13 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1855 MHz to 2495 MHz. It has 6144 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 295W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 96 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 28,211 points. Launch price was $3,999.
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.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon PRO W7900 scores 28,211 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the Radeon PRO W7900 leads by 258.5%. The Radeon PRO W7900 is built on RDNA 3.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 5 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 6,144 (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 61.32 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 2495 MHz vs 1665 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 28,211+259% | 7,869 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 6144+586% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 61.32 TFLOPS+1955% | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2495 MHz+50% | 1665 MHz |
| ROPs | 192+500% | 32 |
| TMUs | 384+586% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 3 MB+241% | 0.88 MB |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+500% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7900 comes with 48 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The Radeon PRO W7900 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 864 GB/s (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 575% advantage for the Radeon PRO W7900. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 6 MB (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the Radeon PRO W7900 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 48 GB+1100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 864 GB/s+575% | 128 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+200% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 6 MB+500% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCN 4.0 (Radeon PRO W7900) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: VCN 4.0 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon PRO W7900) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCN 4.0 | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | VCN 4.0 | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon PRO W7900 draws 295W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 118.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 750W (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: 2x 8-pin vs None. Card length: 267mm vs 229mm, occupying 3 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 295W | 75W-75% |
| Recommended PSU | 750W | 300W-60% |
| Power Connector | 2x 8-pin | None |
| Length | 267mm | 229mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 3 | 2-33% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 70°C-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 95.6 | 104.9+10% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon PRO W7900 launched at $3999 MSRP and currently averages $3500, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 97.9% less ($3425 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.1 (Radeon PRO W7900) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1195.1% better value. The Radeon PRO W7900 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | Radeon PRO W7900 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3999 | $149-96% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $3500 | $75-98% |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.1 | 104.9+1195% |
| Codename | Navi 31 | TU117 |
| Release | April 13 2023 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #26 | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon PRO W7900 and GeForce GTX 1650
