
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 6550M
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
- ✅1.0% more average FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 9,705).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Radeon RX 6550M
2023Why buy it
- ✅+23.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon RX 6550M
2023Why buy it
- ✅1.0% more average FPS across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅+23.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 9,705).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 48 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon RX 6550M 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 RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 105 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 79 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 95 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 80 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 56 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 47 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 44 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 33 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 29 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 191 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 150 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 113 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 72 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 124 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 96 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 73 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 50 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 61 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 47 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 39 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 26 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 335 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 294 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 213 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 174 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 245 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 222 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 166 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 129 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 146 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 128 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 57 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 325 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 251 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 221 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 186 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 231 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 173 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 145 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 118 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 115 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 59 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 6550M

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 RX 6550M
Radeon RX 6550M
The Radeon RX 6550M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2840 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 80W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,705 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 6550M's 9,705 — the Radeon RX 6550M leads by 23.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6550M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,024 (Radeon RX 6550M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.816 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6550M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2840 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 9,705+23% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1024+14% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 5.816 TFLOPS+95% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2840 MHz+71% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 64+14% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+250% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6550M is support for FSR Frame Generation + AFMF. 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 GeForce GTX 1650 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.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 RX 6550M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR 3 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR Frame Generation + AFMF |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 144 GB/s (Radeon RX 6550M) — a 12.5% advantage for the Radeon RX 6550M. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 144 GB/s+13% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon RX 6550M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 3.0 (Radeon RX 6550M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (Radeon RX 6550M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6550M's 80W — a 6.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Radeon RX 6550M). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-6% | 80W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 121.3+16% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6550M is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6550M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 4 2023 |
| Ranking | #323 | #267 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













