
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon PRO W7800
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 $2,350 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 385.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 10.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 260W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7800 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 32 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 W7800
2023Why buy it
- ✅221.1% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (32 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌1577.2% HIGHER MSRP$2,499 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌246.7% higher power demand at 260W vs 75W.
- ❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon PRO W7800
2023Why buy it
- ✅Costs $2,350 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 385.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 10.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 260W, a 185W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅221.1% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (32 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7800 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 32 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
- ❌1577.2% HIGHER MSRP$2,499 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌246.7% higher power demand at 260W vs 75W.
- ❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon PRO W7800 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 W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 225 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 210 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 184 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 168 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 203 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 171 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 142 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 134 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 138 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 115 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 94 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 87 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 619 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 508 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 383 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 329 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 450 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 371 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 300 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 247 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 246 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 206 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 184 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 151 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 918 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 762 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 676 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 580 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 709 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 583 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 505 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 427 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 497 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 411 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 350 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 291 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 881 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 732 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 671 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 583 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 692 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 577 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 512 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 445 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 472 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 405 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 366 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 306 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon PRO W7800

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 W7800
Radeon PRO W7800
The Radeon PRO W7800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 13 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1895 MHz to 2525 MHz. It has 4480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 260W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 70 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 27,180 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon PRO W7800's 27,180 — the Radeon PRO W7800 leads by 245.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W7800 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4,480 (Radeon PRO W7800). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 45.25 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W7800). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2525 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 27,180+245% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 3.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 4480+400% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 45.25 TFLOPS+1416% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2525 MHz+52% |
| ROPs | 32 | 128+300% |
| TMUs | 56 | 280+400% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 2 MB+127% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 6 MB+500% |
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 W7800 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7800 has 32 GB. The Radeon PRO W7800 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 576 GB/s (Radeon PRO W7800) — a 350% advantage for the Radeon PRO W7800. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6 MB (Radeon PRO W7800) — the Radeon PRO W7800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 32 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 576 GB/s+350% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 6 MB+500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7800). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7800). 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 W7800).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7800's 260W — a 110.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (Radeon PRO W7800). Power connectors: None vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-71% | 260W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 104.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W7800 launched at $2499. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 94% less ($2350 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.9 (Radeon PRO W7800) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 384.4% better value. The Radeon PRO W7800 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-94% | $2499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+384% | 10.9 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 31 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | April 13 2023 |
| Ranking | #323 | #28 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













