GeForce RTX 4070 vs Radeon X1650 GTO
GeForce RTX 4070
Popular choices:
Radeon X1650 GTO
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. 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 GeForce RTX 4070
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1650 GTO
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 4070 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 35792% higher G3D Mark score and 2300% more VRAM (12 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon X1650 GTO.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+35792%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-35792%) |
| Longevity | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) / 5nm) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (12 GB) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (304mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 4070 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $550 (vs $20), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 1205.2% better value per dollar than the Radeon X1650 GTO.
| Insight | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1205.2%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($550) | ✅More affordable ($20) |
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 GeForce RTX 4070 and Radeon X1650 GTO
GeForce RTX 4070
The GeForce RTX 4070 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 1920 MHz to 2475 MHz. It has 5888 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,919 points. Launch price was $599.
Radeon X1650 GTO
The Radeon X1650 GTO is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 10 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1925 MHz to 2324 MHz. It has 5120 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 335W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 80 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 75 points. Launch price was $1,099.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce RTX 4070 scores 26,919 versus the Radeon X1650 GTO's 75 — the GeForce RTX 4070 leads by 35792%. The GeForce RTX 4070 is built on Ada Lovelace while the Radeon X1650 GTO uses RDNA 2.0, both on 5 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 5,888 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 5,120 (Radeon X1650 GTO). Raw compute: 29.15 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 23.8 TFLOPS (Radeon X1650 GTO). Boost clocks: 2475 MHz vs 2324 MHz. Ray tracing: 46 RT cores (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 80 (Radeon X1650 GTO) with 184 Tensor cores.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 26,919+35792% | 75 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 5 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 5888+15% | 5120 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 29.15 TFLOPS+22% | 23.8 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2475 MHz+6% | 2324 MHz |
| ROPs | 64 | 128+100% |
| TMUs | 184 | 320+74% |
| L1 Cache | 5.8 MB+480% | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+800% | 4 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 46 | 80+74% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 is support for DLSS 3 Frame Gen. 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 Radeon X1650 GTO lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon X1650 GTO relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | DLSS 3.5 | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | DLSS 3.0 (Native) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | Yes (DLSS 3.5) | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce RTX 4070 comes with 12 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon X1650 GTO has 512 MB. The GeForce RTX 4070 offers 2300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 192-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 36 MB (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 4 MB (Radeon X1650 GTO) — the GeForce RTX 4070 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 12 GB+2300% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6X | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 192-bit+200% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 36 MB+800% | 4 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce RTX 4070 draws 200W versus the Radeon X1650 GTO's 335W — a 50.5% difference. The GeForce RTX 4070 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 650W (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 350W (Radeon X1650 GTO). Power connectors: 8-pin vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W-40% | 335W |
| Recommended PSU | 650W | 350W-46% |
| Power Connector | 8-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 304mm | — |
| Height | 137mm | — |
| Slots | 3 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 134.6+67200% | 0.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 4070 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $550, while the Radeon X1650 GTO launched at $150 and now averages $20. The Radeon X1650 GTO costs 96.4% less ($530 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 48.9 (GeForce RTX 4070) vs 3.8 (Radeon X1650 GTO) — the GeForce RTX 4070 offers 1186.8% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2022).
| Feature | GeForce RTX 4070 | Radeon X1650 GTO |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $599 | $150-75% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $550 | $20-96% |
| Performance per Dollar | 48.9+1187% | 3.8 |
| Codename | AD104 | Navi 21 |
| Release | April 12 2023 | May 10 2022 |
| Ranking | #32 | #25 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce RTX 4070 and Radeon X1650 GTO
