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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,750 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,899 MSRP).
✅Delivers 656.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 7.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,899 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 250W, a 175W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 305mm, a 76mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Pro VII across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Radeon Pro VII

2020

Why buy it

✅109.1% more average FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Vega 20 on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌
1174.5% HIGHER MSRP
$1,899 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 7.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($1,899 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌233.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 75W.
❌33.2% longer card at 305mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon Pro VII

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,750 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,899 MSRP).
✅Delivers 656.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 7.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,899 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 250W, a 175W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 305mm, a 76mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅109.1% more average FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Vega 20 on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Pro VII across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌
1174.5% HIGHER MSRP
$1,899 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 7.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($1,899 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌233.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 75W.
❌33.2% longer card at 305mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon Pro VII better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon Pro VII is clearly the better overall GPU here. Radeon Pro VII averages 109.1% more FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 13,264 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon Pro VII is a 2020 card with FSR upscaling, while GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon Pro VII is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2019, 68.6% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 16 GB instead of 4 GB, and better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Radeon Pro VII is about 1174.5% more expensive on MSRP at $1,899 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 109.1% more estimated average FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data and 68.6% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium. If you are comfortable paying the premium for the stronger gaming result, Radeon Pro VII is the one to buy. If staying closer to budget matters more, GeForce GTX 1650 still makes more sense on price alone, but the performance trade-off is much harder to justify by current standards.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. This mostly comes down to price. If you want to stay closer to $149 MSRP, it remains a strong choice; if you are comfortable paying more, Radeon Pro VII earns that extra money with a clearly stronger gaming result and a more complete overall package.

Games Benchmarks

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 9800X3D 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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro VII Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
1080p
low	94 FPS	199 FPS
medium	83 FPS	184 FPS
high	70 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	146 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	185 FPS
medium	74 FPS	154 FPS
high	60 FPS	128 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	119 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	118 FPS
medium	39 FPS	99 FPS
high	27 FPS	75 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	69 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro VII

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
1080p
low	136 FPS	340 FPS
medium	113 FPS	298 FPS
high	94 FPS	225 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	173 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	215 FPS
medium	62 FPS	185 FPS
high	44 FPS	152 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	120 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	102 FPS
medium	27 FPS	86 FPS
high	21 FPS	74 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	57 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro VII

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
1080p
low	323 FPS	597 FPS
medium	283 FPS	478 FPS
high	205 FPS	398 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	298 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	448 FPS
medium	202 FPS	358 FPS
high	151 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	224 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	298 FPS
medium	117 FPS	239 FPS
high	79 FPS	199 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	149 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro VII

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
1080p
low	261 FPS	525 FPS
medium	211 FPS	452 FPS
high	191 FPS	388 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	298 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	426 FPS
medium	158 FPS	358 FPS
high	135 FPS	298 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	224 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	263 FPS
medium	74 FPS	239 FPS
high	65 FPS	199 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	149 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro VII

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon Pro VII

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.

Radeon Pro VII

The Radeon Pro VII is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2020. It features the GCN 5.1 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1400 MHz to 1700 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,264 points. Launch price was $1,899.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro VII's 13,264 — the Radeon Pro VII leads by 68.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro VII uses GCN 5.1, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,840 (Radeon Pro VII). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 13.06 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro VII). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1700 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
G3D Mark Score	7,869	13,264+69%
Architecture	Turing	GCN 5.1
Process Node	12 nm	7 nm
Shading Units	896	3840+329%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	13.06 TFLOPS+338%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	1700 MHz+2%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	240+329%
L1 Cache	896 KB	960 KB+7%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro VII relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro VII has 16 GB. The Radeon Pro VII offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro VII) — the Radeon Pro VII has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	16 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Radeon Pro VII). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	6+100%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCE 4.1 (Radeon Pro VII). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs UVD 7.2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon Pro VII).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCE 4.1
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	UVD 7.2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro VII's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Radeon Pro VII). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 305mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro VII
TDP	75W-70%	250W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	305mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+98%	53.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro VII launched at $1899. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 92.2% less ($1750 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 7.0 (Radeon Pro VII) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 654.3% better value. The Radeon Pro VII is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).