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

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $5,851 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $6,000 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1719.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 2.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $6,000 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 300W, a 225W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Pro W6900X across 49 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 W6900X

2021

Why buy it

✅178.9% more average FPS across 49 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 2.0 on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌
3926.8% HIGHER MSRP
$6,000 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($6,000 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 300W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon Pro W6900X

2021

Why buy it

✅Costs $5,851 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $6,000 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1719.7% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 2.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $6,000 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 300W, a 225W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅178.9% more average FPS across 49 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 2.0 on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon Pro W6900X across 49 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

❌
3926.8% HIGHER MSRP
$6,000 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 2.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($6,000 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 300W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon Pro W6900X better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon Pro W6900X is clearly the better overall GPU here. Radeon Pro W6900X averages 178.9% more FPS across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 17,413 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon Pro W6900X is a 2021 card with FSR upscaling, while GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. 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 Pro W6900X is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2021 generation instead of 2019, 121.3% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 32 GB instead of 4 GB, and better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

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

Radeon Pro W6900X is about 3926.8% more expensive on MSRP at $6,000 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 178.9% more estimated average FPS across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data and 121.3% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium. If you are comfortable paying the premium for the stronger gaming result, Radeon Pro W6900X is the one to buy. If staying closer to budget matters more, GeForce GTX 1650 still makes more sense on price alone, but the performance trade-off is much harder to justify by current standards.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. This mostly comes down to price. If you want to stay closer to $149 MSRP, it remains a strong choice; if you are comfortable paying more, Radeon Pro W6900X earns that extra money with a clearly stronger gaming result and a more complete overall package.

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 Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro W6900X Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
1080p
low	94 FPS	258 FPS
medium	83 FPS	235 FPS
high	70 FPS	203 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	176 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	242 FPS
medium	74 FPS	200 FPS
high	60 FPS	162 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	146 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	171 FPS
medium	39 FPS	143 FPS
high	27 FPS	107 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	95 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro W6900X

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
1080p
low	136 FPS	564 FPS
medium	113 FPS	467 FPS
high	94 FPS	370 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	305 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	370 FPS
medium	62 FPS	303 FPS
high	44 FPS	250 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	195 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	160 FPS
medium	27 FPS	135 FPS
high	21 FPS	113 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	88 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro W6900X

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
1080p
low	323 FPS	784 FPS
medium	283 FPS	627 FPS
high	205 FPS	522 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	392 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	588 FPS
medium	202 FPS	470 FPS
high	151 FPS	392 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	294 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	392 FPS
medium	117 FPS	313 FPS
high	79 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	196 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro W6900X

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
1080p
low	261 FPS	684 FPS
medium	211 FPS	565 FPS
high	191 FPS	494 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	392 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	561 FPS
medium	158 FPS	468 FPS
high	135 FPS	392 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	294 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	363 FPS
medium	74 FPS	313 FPS
high	65 FPS	261 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	196 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon Pro W6900X

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon Pro W6900X

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 W6900X

The Radeon Pro W6900X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 3 2021. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1825 MHz to 2150 MHz. It has 5120 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 80 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 17,413 points. Launch price was $4,999.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon Pro W6900X's 17,413 — the Radeon Pro W6900X leads by 121.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro W6900X uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5,120 (Radeon Pro W6900X). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 22.02 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro W6900X). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2150 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
G3D Mark Score	7,869	17,413+121%
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	7 nm
Shading Units	896	5120+471%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	22.02 TFLOPS+638%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2150 MHz+29%
ROPs	32	128+300%
TMUs	56	320+471%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	1 MB+14%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

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 W6900X relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
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 W6900X has 32 GB. The Radeon Pro W6900X offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon Pro W6900X) — the Radeon Pro W6900X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	32 GB+700%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon Pro W6900X). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 6.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
DirectX	12	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	6+100%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon Pro W6900X). 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 (Radeon Pro W6900X).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
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

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon Pro W6900X's 300W — a 120% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (Radeon Pro W6900X). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 4 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon Pro W6900X
TDP	75W-75%	300W
Recommended PSU	300W-54%	650W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	120mm
Slots	2-50%	4
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+81%	58.0

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro W6900X launched at $6000. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 97.5% less ($5851 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.9 (Radeon Pro W6900X) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1720.7% better value. The Radeon Pro W6900X is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2019).