Radeon R9 M265X vs GeForce GTX 1650

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 R9 M265X is positioned at rank #448 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 Radeon R9 M265X

#438

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1859%

#440

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1685%

#441

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1681%

#445

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1528%

#446

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1518%

#448

Radeon R9 M265X

MSRP: $200|Avg: $30

100%

#449

Mobility Radeon HD 5165

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

99%

#450

Radeon R5 M435

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

98%

#451

Radeon E8860

MSRP: $300|Avg: $50

96%

#452

Radeon R7 M380

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

95%

#453

Radeon HD 7650A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $49

95%

#454

GeForce 820A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $30

95%

#455

Radeon HD 8650G + 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

95%

#456

Radeon HD 7850M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

94%

#457

Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7730M Dual

MSRP: $160|Avg: $40

94%

#458

Radeon HD 8550G + HD 7600M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

94%

#459

Radeon HD 8450G + 8600M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

93%

#460

Radeon R9 M275X

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

93%

#461

Mobility Radeon HD 550v

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

93%

#462

GeForce 8400 GS

MSRP: $30|Avg: $30

93%

#463

Radeon HD 8280G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

92%

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 R9 M265X lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 574.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M265X.

Insight	Radeon R9 M265X	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-574.3%)	✅Leading raw performance (+574.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $30), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 169.7% better value per dollar than the Radeon R9 M265X.

Insight	Radeon R9 M265X	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+169.7%)
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($30)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($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.

Radeon R9 M265X Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M265X and GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon R9 M265X

The Radeon R9 M265X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 21 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 575 MHz to 625 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,167 points.

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 R9 M265X scores 1,167 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 574.3%. The Radeon R9 M265X is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R9 M265X) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.8 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M265X) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 625 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	Radeon R9 M265X	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	1,167	7,869+574%
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	640	896+40%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.8 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+273%
Boost Clock	625 MHz	1665 MHz+166%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	40	56+40%
L1 Cache	160 KB	896 KB+460%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 M265X	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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R9 M265X) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 M265X	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 M265X draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R9 M265X) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Mobile vs None.

Feature	Radeon R9 M265X	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Mobile	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	—	2
Temp (Load)	—	70°C
Perf/Watt	15.6	104.9+572%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R9 M265X launched at $200 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The Radeon R9 M265X costs 60% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 38.9 (Radeon R9 M265X) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 169.7% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).