
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon PRO W6300
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.
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
2019Why buy it
- ✅+41.5% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 90% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌200% higher power demand at 75W vs 25W.
Radeon PRO W6300
2022Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 25W instead of 75W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,560 vs 7,869).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌34.2% HIGHER MSRP$200 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($200 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon PRO W6300
2022Why buy it
- ✅+41.5% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Costs $51 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 90% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $200 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
Why buy it
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 25W instead of 75W, a 50W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌200% higher power demand at 75W vs 25W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (5,560 vs 7,869).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌34.2% HIGHER MSRP$200 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($200 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon PRO W6300?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon PRO W6300 make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650?
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 126 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 111 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 69 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 110 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 75 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 56 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 47 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 43 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 31 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 28 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 165 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 131 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 65 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 107 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 60 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 44 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 55 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 41 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 32 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 21 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 250 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 200 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 125 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 150 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 94 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 125 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 100 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 83 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 63 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 250 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 200 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 125 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 188 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 150 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 125 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 94 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 109 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 82 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 70 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 53 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon PRO W6300

GeForce GTX 1650
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 W6300
Radeon PRO W6300
The Radeon PRO W6300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 19 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1512 MHz to 2040 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,560 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon PRO W6300's 5,560 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 41.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W6300 uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 768 (Radeon PRO W6300). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.133 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W6300). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2040 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+42% | 5,560 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+17% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 3.133 TFLOPS+5% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2040 MHz+23% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56+17% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+250% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
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 W6300 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W6300 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon PRO W6300's 25W — a 100% difference. The Radeon PRO W6300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon PRO W6300). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 25W-67% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 222.4+112% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W6300 launched at $200. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 25.5% less ($51 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 27.8 (Radeon PRO W6300) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 89.9% better value. The Radeon PRO W6300 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W6300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-26% | $200 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+90% | 27.8 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 19 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #413 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













