Radeon R9 M385X 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 M385X is positioned at rank #429 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 M385X

#419

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1633%

#421

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1480%

#422

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1476%

#426

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1342%

#427

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1333%

#429

Radeon R9 M385X

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#431

Mobility Radeon HD 5570

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

99%

#432

Radeon R5 M430

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

99%

#433

GeForce 810A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

98%

#434

GeForce GT 520MX

MSRP: $45|Avg: $10

97%

#435

Radeon R5 330

MSRP: $81|Avg: $45

97%

#437

Radeon HD 8450G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

96%

#438

Radeon R3

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

94%

#439

Radeon HD 7520G + HD 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

94%

#441

Radeon HD 8550G + 8600M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

93%

#443

Radeon R9 M360

MSRP: $300|Avg: $81

91%

#444

Radeon HD 8550G + 7600M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

90%

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 M385X 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 294.6% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M385X.

Insight	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-294.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+294.6%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+700%)
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. Priced at $75 versus $300 for the Radeon R9 M385X, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 1478.5% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1478.5%)
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 M385X Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M385X and GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon R9 M385X

The Radeon R9 M385X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1100 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,994 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 M385X scores 1,994 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 294.6%. The Radeon R9 M385X is built on GCN 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 896 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 1.971 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1100 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	1,994	7,869+295%
Architecture	GCN 2.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	896	896
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.971 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+51%
Boost Clock	1100 MHz	1665 MHz+51%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	56	56
L1 Cache	224 KB	896 KB+300%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	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 R9 M385X comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	4 GB+700%
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 (12_0) (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (12_0)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	VCE 2.0	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	UVD 4.2	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 M385X 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 M385X) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Mobile vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85 vs 70°C.

Feature	Radeon R9 M385X	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Mobile	None
Length	0mm	229mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	85	70°C-18%
Perf/Watt	26.6	104.9+294%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R9 M385X 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): 6.6 (Radeon R9 M385X) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1489.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).