Radeon Pro WX 7100 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Radeon Pro WX 7100
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
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. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is positioned at rank #144 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 WX 7100
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% 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 Ti.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti holds the technical lead. Priced at $77 (vs $180), it costs 57% less, resulting in a 128.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+128.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($180) | ✅More affordable ($77) |
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 WX 7100 and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Radeon Pro WX 7100
The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 10 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1188 MHz to 1243 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,701 points. Launch price was $799.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 9 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 928 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,525 points. Launch price was $149.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon Pro WX 7100 scores 7,701 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti reaches 7,525 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Raw compute: 5.728 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,701+2% | 7,525 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+200% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.728 TFLOPS+302% | 1.425 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 144+125% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB+800% | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| 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 WX 7100 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti has 4 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 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 WX 7100) vs 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — the Radeon Pro WX 7100 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.3+18% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Decoder: UVD 6.3 vs NVDEC 4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 3.4 | NVENC 6 (Volta) |
| Decoder | UVD 6.3 | NVDEC 4 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Pro WX 7100 draws 130W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti's 50W — a 88.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75.
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 130W | 50W-62% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 0W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 241mm | 0mm |
| Height | 112mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 59.2 | 150.5+154% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Pro WX 7100 launched at $799 MSRP and currently averages $180, while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 and now averages $77. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 57.2% less ($103 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 42.8 (Radeon Pro WX 7100) vs 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 128.3% better value. The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2012).
| Feature | Radeon Pro WX 7100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $799 | $150-81% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $180 | $77-57% |
| Performance per Dollar | 42.8 | 97.7+128% |
| Codename | Ellesmere | GK106 |
| Release | November 10 2016 | October 9 2012 |
| Ranking | #331 | #633 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon Pro WX 7100 and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
