
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon PRO W7600
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
- ✅Costs $450 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 92.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.5 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 130W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 240mm, a 11mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 16,443).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 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 W7600
2023Why buy it
- ✅+109% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌302% HIGHER MSRP$599 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌73.3% higher power demand at 130W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon PRO W7600
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $450 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 92.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 27.5 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $599 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 130W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 240mm, a 11mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅+109% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 16,443).
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 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
- ❌302% HIGHER MSRP$599 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 27.5 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($599 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌73.3% higher power demand at 130W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon PRO W7600 better than GeForce GTX 1650?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
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 W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 129 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 112 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 64 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 69 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 48 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 49 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 42 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 31 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 26 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 172 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 143 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 75 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 120 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 73 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 53 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 54 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 31 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 740 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 592 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 493 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 370 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 555 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 444 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 370 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 277 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 370 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 296 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 247 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 185 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 244 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 210 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 173 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 139 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 187 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 164 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 129 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 104 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 102 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 84 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 68 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 54 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon PRO W7600

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 W7600
Radeon PRO W7600
The Radeon PRO W7600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 3 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2440 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 16,443 points. Launch price was $599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon PRO W7600's 16,443 — the Radeon PRO W7600 leads by 109%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W7600 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,048 (Radeon PRO W7600). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2440 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 16,443+109% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 2048+129% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2440 MHz+47% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 56 | 128+129% |
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 W7600 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7600 has 8 GB. The Radeon PRO W7600 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 224 GB/s (Radeon PRO W7600) — a 75% advantage for the Radeon PRO W7600. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 224 GB/s+75% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7600). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon PRO W7600). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon PRO W7600).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 4.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 4.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon PRO W7600's 130W — a 53.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (Radeon PRO W7600). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 240mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-42% | 130W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 240mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 126.5+21% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W7600 launched at $599. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 75.1% less ($450 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 27.5 (Radeon PRO W7600) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 92% better value. The Radeon PRO W7600 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7600 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-75% | $599 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+92% | 27.5 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 33 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | August 3 2023 |
| Ranking | #323 | #123 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













