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 $850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 128.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 23.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 190W, a 115W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7700 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 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 W7700

2023

Why buy it

✅164.7% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌
570.5% HIGHER MSRP
$999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 23.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌153.3% higher power demand at 190W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon PRO W7700

2023

Why buy it

✅Costs $850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 128.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 23.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 190W, a 115W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅164.7% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7700 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 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

❌
570.5% HIGHER MSRP
$999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 23.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌153.3% higher power demand at 190W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon PRO W7700 better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon PRO W7700 is clearly the better overall GPU here. Radeon PRO W7700 averages 164.7% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 23,062 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon PRO W7700 is a 2023 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 W7700 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2023 generation instead of 2019, 193.1% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 16 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 W7700 is about 570.5% more expensive on MSRP at $999 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 164.7% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 193.1% 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 W7700 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 W7700 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 W7700 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
1080p
low	94 FPS	223 FPS
medium	83 FPS	205 FPS
high	70 FPS	179 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	163 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	201 FPS
medium	74 FPS	167 FPS
high	60 FPS	139 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	130 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	136 FPS
medium	39 FPS	114 FPS
high	27 FPS	91 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	84 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon PRO W7700

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
1080p
low	136 FPS	561 FPS
medium	113 FPS	462 FPS
high	94 FPS	360 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	302 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	369 FPS
medium	62 FPS	305 FPS
high	44 FPS	248 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	210 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	168 FPS
medium	27 FPS	138 FPS
high	21 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	91 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon PRO W7700

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
1080p
low	323 FPS	911 FPS
medium	283 FPS	741 FPS
high	205 FPS	644 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	519 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	704 FPS
medium	202 FPS	567 FPS
high	151 FPS	481 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	389 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	492 FPS
medium	117 FPS	395 FPS
high	79 FPS	329 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	259 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon PRO W7700

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
1080p
low	261 FPS	785 FPS
medium	211 FPS	653 FPS
high	191 FPS	591 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	506 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	622 FPS
medium	158 FPS	517 FPS
high	135 FPS	463 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	389 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	399 FPS
medium	74 FPS	346 FPS
high	65 FPS	318 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	259 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon PRO W7700

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon PRO W7700

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 W7700

The Radeon PRO W7700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2023. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1900 MHz to 2600 MHz. It has 3072 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 48 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 23,062 points. Launch price was $999.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon PRO W7700's 23,062 — the Radeon PRO W7700 leads by 193.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W7700 uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,072 (Radeon PRO W7700). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 31.95 TFLOPS (Radeon PRO W7700). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2600 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
G3D Mark Score	7,869	23,062+193%
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	5 nm
Shading Units	896	3072+243%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS+971%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2600 MHz+56%
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	56	192+243%
L1 Cache	896 KB+17%	768 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

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 W7700 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
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 W7700 has 16 GB. The Radeon PRO W7700 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 432 GB/s (Radeon PRO W7700) — a 237.5% advantage for the Radeon PRO W7700. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (Radeon PRO W7700) — the Radeon PRO W7700 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	16 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	432 GB/s+238%
Bus Width	128-bit	192-bit+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7700). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
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 W7700). 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 W7700).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon PRO W7700
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 W7700's 190W — a 86.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 550W (Radeon PRO W7700). Power connectors: None vs 1x 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 W7700
TDP	75W-61%	190W
Recommended PSU	300W-45%	550W
Power Connector	None	1x 8-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	121.4+16%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W7700 launched at $999. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 85.1% less ($850 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 23.1 (Radeon PRO W7700) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 128.6% better value. The Radeon PRO W7700 is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).