Radeon R9 M395 vs GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon R9 M395

2015Core: 834 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Radeon R9 M395

4,934

0.0%

7,869

+59.5%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

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 R9 M395 is positioned at rank #283 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 M395

#61

GeForce RTX 2070 (móvel)

MSRP: $800|Avg: $350

94%

#273

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

660%

#275

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

598%

#276

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

597%

#280

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

543%

#281

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

539%

#283

Radeon R9 M395

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

100%

#285

GeForce GT 755M SLI

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

100%

#286

GeForce GTX 950A

MSRP: $159|Avg: $30

99%

#288

Radeon 540X

MSRP: $99|Avg: $40

98%

#289

GeForce 930MX

MSRP: $80|Avg: $25

97%

#291

GeForce MX250

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

96%

#292

Radeon 630

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

96%

#293

GeForce MX330

MSRP: $150|Avg: $100

95%

#297

Radeon RX 780

MSRP: $499|Avg: $721

93%

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 M395 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 59.5% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R9 M395.

Insight	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-59.5%)	✅Leading raw performance (+59.5%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN (2012−2015))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
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 M395, it costs 75% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 537.9% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+537.9%)
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 M395 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R9 M395 and GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon R9 M395

The Radeon R9 M395 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 9 2015. It features the GCN architecture. The core clock speed is 834 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,934 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 M395 scores 4,934 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 59.5%. The Radeon R9 M395 is built on GCN while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Radeon R9 M395) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	4,934	7,869+59%
Architecture	GCN	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	1792+100%	896

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	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 M395 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 176 GB/s (Radeon R9 M395) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 37.5% advantage for the Radeon R9 M395. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	176 GB/s+38%	128 GB/s
Bus Width	256-bit+100%	128-bit

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FL12_0) (Radeon R9 M395) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (FL12_0)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: UVD (Radeon R9 M395) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: VCE vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4 (Radeon R9 M395) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	UVD	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	VCE	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,MPEG-4	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon R9 M395 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 M395) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Mobile vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.

Feature	Radeon R9 M395	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)	75°C	70°C-7%
Perf/Watt	65.8	104.9+59%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon R9 M395 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): 16.4 (Radeon R9 M395) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 539.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).