
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
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 $3,350 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1301.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 3.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 400W, a 325W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 280mm, a 51mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 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 W7900 Dual Slot
2021Why buy it
- ✅129.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌2248.3% HIGHER MSRP$3,499 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 3.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($3,499 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌433.3% higher power demand at 400W vs 75W.
- ❌22.3% longer card at 280mm vs 229mm.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
2021Why buy it
- ✅Costs $3,350 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 1301.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 3.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $3,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 400W, a 325W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 280mm, a 51mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅129.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 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
- ❌2248.3% HIGHER MSRP$3,499 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 3.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($3,499 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌433.3% higher power demand at 400W vs 75W.
- ❌22.3% longer card at 280mm vs 229mm.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot 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 W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 154 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 134 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 114 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 144 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 117 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 102 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 93 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 77 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 61 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 54 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 579 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 390 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 297 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 397 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 326 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 263 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 218 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 159 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 137 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 117 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 94 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 593 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 297 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 445 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 356 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 297 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 222 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 297 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 198 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 148 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 593 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 475 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 395 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 297 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 445 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 356 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 297 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 222 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 297 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 237 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 198 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 148 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot

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 W7900 Dual Slot
Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot
The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 3 2021. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1800 MHz to 1967 MHz. It has 3840 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 400W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 60 ×2 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,182 points. Launch price was $4,999.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot's 13,182 — the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot leads by 67.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,840 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 15.11 TFLOPS ×2 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1967 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 13,182+68% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 3840 ×2+329% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 15.11 TFLOPS ×2+406% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1967 MHz+18% |
| ROPs | 32 | 96 ×2+200% |
| TMUs | 56 | 240 ×2+329% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+17% | 768 KB |
| 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 W7900 Dual Slot relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 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 W7900 Dual Slot has 8 GB. The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 864 GB/s (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) — a 575% advantage for the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) — the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 864 GB/s+575% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (2x) (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 4.0 (2x). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 4.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 4.0 (2x) |
| 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 W7900 Dual Slot's 400W — a 136.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 280mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-81% | 400W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 280mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+218% | 33.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot launched at $3499. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 95.7% less ($3350 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.8 (Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1289.5% better value. The Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon PRO W7900 Dual Slot |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-96% | $3499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+1289% | 3.8 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 21 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | August 3 2021 |
| Ranking | #323 | #157 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













