Radeon R9 M275X / M375 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 M275X / M375 is positioned at rank #469 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 M275X / M375

#459

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

2068%

#461

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1875%

#462

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1870%

#466

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1700%

#467

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1689%

#469

Radeon R9 M275X / M375

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#470

Radeon HD 8650G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

100%

#471

Radeon R9 M370X

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

100%

#472

Radeon HD 8280

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

99%

#473

GeForce GTX 850A

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

97%

#474

Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

97%

#475

Mobility Radeon HD 5730

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

97%

#476

Radeon R7 A10-7700K

MSRP: $152|Avg: $118

97%

#477

Radeon HD 7660G + HD 8500M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

96%

#479

Radeon HD 6990M Crossfire

MSRP: $699|Avg: $150

95%

#480

Radeon HD 8510G + 8500M Dual

MSRP: $120|Avg: $35

95%

#481

Radeon R5 M330

MSRP: $120|Avg: $20

95%

#482

Radeon HD 8650G + 7600M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

94%

#483

GeForce GTX 760A

MSRP: $249|Avg: $40

94%

#484

Radeon R9 M270X

MSRP: $250|Avg: $40

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 M275X / M375 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 399.6% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M275X / M375.

Insight	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-399.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+399.6%)
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	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $300 for the Radeon R9 M275X / M375, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 1898.5% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1898.5%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)	✅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.

Radeon R9 M275X / M375 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M275X / M375 and GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon R9 M275X / M375

The Radeon R9 M275X / M375 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 28 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 925 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,575 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 M275X / M375 scores 1,575 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 399.6%. The Radeon R9 M275X / M375 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 M275X / M375) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 1.184 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M275X / M375) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 925 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	1,575	7,869+400%
Architecture	GCN 1.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	640	896+40%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.184 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+152%
Boost Clock	925 MHz	1665 MHz+80%
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 M275X / M375	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 M275X / M375) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	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%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12_0 (Radeon R9 M275X / M375) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.

Feature	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12_0	12
Max Displays	0	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 M275X / M375) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 4th gen.

Feature	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	VCE 2.0	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	UVD 4.2	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	—	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 M275X / M375 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 M275X / M375) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Mobile vs None. Card length: 1mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.

Feature	Radeon R9 M275X / M375	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Mobile	None
Length	1mm	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	—	70°C
Perf/Watt	21.0	104.9+400%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R9 M275X / M375 launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 75% less ($225 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.3 (Radeon R9 M275X / M375) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1879.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).