Radeon RX 6500 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Radeon RX 6500
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 RX 6500 is positioned at rank #118 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced 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 RX 6500
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is significantly newer (2012 vs 0). The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon RX 6500 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon RX 6500 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | Legacy (Standard Node) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| 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 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $77 versus $150 for the Radeon RX 6500, it costs 49% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 92.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+92.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅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 RX 6500 and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Radeon RX 6500
The Radeon RX 6500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in sem dados. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,610 points.
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 RX 6500 scores 7,610 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti reaches 7,525 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,610+1% | 7,525 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6500 is support for FSR 3 / AFMF. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 3 (Native) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 / AFMF (Driver) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Memory bandwidth: 144 GB/s (Radeon RX 6500) vs 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — a 33.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 144 GB/s | 192 GB/s+33% |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (Radeon RX 6500) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2+2% | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 3+50% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Radeon RX 6500) vs NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Decoder: VCN 3.0 vs NVDEC 4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon RX 6500) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti).
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC 6 (Volta) |
| Decoder | VCN 3.0 | NVDEC 4 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon RX 6500 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti's 50W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (Radeon RX 6500) vs 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None. Card length: 172mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 75.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 50W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 400W | 0W-100% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Length | 172mm | 0mm |
| Height | 112mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 75-12% |
| Perf/Watt | 101.5 | 150.5+48% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6500 launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 and now averages $77. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 48.7% less ($73 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 50.7 (Radeon RX 6500) vs 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 92.7% better value.
| Feature | Radeon RX 6500 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | $150-25% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $77-49% |
| Performance per Dollar | 50.7 | 97.7+93% |
| Codename | — | GK106 |
| Release | sem dados | October 9 2012 |
| Ranking | #335 | #633 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon RX 6500 and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
