Radeon TM 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 TM is positioned at rank #55 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced 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 TM

#19

Radeon RX 5600

MSRP: $229|Avg: $150

92%

#45

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

195%

#47

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

177%

#48

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

176%

#52

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

160%

#53

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

159%

#55

Radeon TM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#58

GeForce 770M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

97%

#62

Radeon 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

96%

#65

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

95%

#66

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

94%

#68

GeForce GTX 850M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

91%

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

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 41.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon TM.

Insight	Radeon TM	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-41.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+41.4%)
Longevity	RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm)	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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 TM Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon TM and GeForce GTX 1650

Radeon TM

The Radeon TM is manufactured by AMD. It was released in July 15 2024. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 400 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,564 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 TM scores 5,564 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 41.4%. The Radeon TM is built on RDNA 3.5 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 4 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon TM) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 5.939 TFLOPS (Radeon TM) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 2900 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	Radeon TM	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	5,564	7,869+41%
Architecture	RDNA 3.5	Turing
Process Node	4 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	1024+14%	896
Compute (TFLOPS)	5.939 TFLOPS+99%	2.984 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	2900 MHz+74%	1665 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64+14%	56
L1 Cache	256 KB	896 KB+250%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon TM	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 video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon TM) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the Radeon TM has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon TM	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon TM draws 15W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 133.3% difference. The Radeon TM is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon TM) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.

Feature	Radeon TM	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	15W-80%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	—	2
Temp (Load)	—	70°C
Perf/Watt	370.9+254%	104.9