GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) vs Radeon 780M

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 (Mobile)

2020

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌233.3% higher power demand at 50W vs 15W.

Radeon 780M

2024

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 50W, a 35W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

2020

Radeon 780M

2024

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 50W, a 35W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm 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.
❌233.3% higher power demand at 50W vs 15W.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) better than Radeon 780M?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 6,968 vs 6,906 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is a 2020 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon 780M is a 2024 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. 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 780M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2024 generation instead of 2020, better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 4nm process instead of 12nm. That broader feature stack should age better as more games lean on modern upscaling and frame-generation support.

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

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) can still make sense if you find it at the right price, especially around Unknown MSRP. GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is still the smarter buy for most people, though, because the raw performance is close while the overall package is cleaner. GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 0.9% higher G3D Mark. Radeon 780M is the newer 2024 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 50W), and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon 780M make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)?

Yes. Radeon 780M is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (15W vs 50W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile). The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) currently gives you 0.9% higher G3D Mark. G3D-per-dollar is basically tied between them.

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 (Mobile) Benchmark Check

Radeon 780M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
1080p
low	115 FPS	93 FPS
medium	102 FPS	78 FPS
high	84 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	63 FPS	43 FPS
1440p
low	106 FPS	80 FPS
medium	90 FPS	68 FPS
high	71 FPS	51 FPS
ultra	52 FPS	32 FPS
4K
low	44 FPS	29 FPS
medium	40 FPS	27 FPS
high	28 FPS	18 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	16 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open Radeon 780M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
1080p
low	150 FPS	96 FPS
medium	126 FPS	67 FPS
high	107 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	75 FPS	32 FPS
1440p
low	88 FPS	67 FPS
medium	68 FPS	45 FPS
high	52 FPS	33 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	23 FPS
4K
low	38 FPS	35 FPS
medium	28 FPS	25 FPS
high	22 FPS	20 FPS
ultra	17 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open Radeon 780M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
1080p
low	314 FPS	310 FPS
medium	251 FPS	249 FPS
high	209 FPS	206 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	155 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	227 FPS
medium	188 FPS	186 FPS
high	157 FPS	155 FPS
ultra	118 FPS	117 FPS
4K
low	157 FPS	137 FPS
medium	125 FPS	123 FPS
high	104 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	70 FPS	59 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open Radeon 780M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
1080p
low	283 FPS	173 FPS
medium	229 FPS	136 FPS
high	200 FPS	112 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	88 FPS
1440p
low	213 FPS	119 FPS
medium	170 FPS	96 FPS
high	138 FPS	81 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	65 FPS
4K
low	105 FPS	71 FPS
medium	81 FPS	57 FPS
high	70 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	55 FPS	33 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open Radeon 780M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) and Radeon 780M

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1485 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,968 points.

Radeon 780M

The Radeon 780M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 800 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,906 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) scores 6,968 and the Radeon 780M reaches 6,906 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is built on Turing while the Radeon 780M uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 768 (Radeon 780M). Raw compute: 3.041 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 8.909 TFLOPS (Radeon 780M). Boost clocks: 1485 MHz vs 2900 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
G3D Mark Score	6,968	6,906
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	1024+33%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.041 TFLOPS	8.909 TFLOPS+193%
Boost Clock	1485 MHz	2900 MHz+95%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64+33%	48
L1 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon 780M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 2 MB (Radeon 780M) — the Radeon 780M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	System
Bus Width	128-bit	System
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 12.2 (Radeon 780M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs VCN 4.0 (Radeon 780M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon 780M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	Radeon 780M
Encoder	NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing)	VCN 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th Gen	VCN 4.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) draws 50W versus the Radeon 780M's 15W — a 107.7% difference. The Radeon 780M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 350W (Radeon 780M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.