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 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro WX 7130: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro WX 7130 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 130W, a 80W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌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.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 6.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).

Radeon Pro WX 7130

2016

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 6.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($1,000 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌160% higher power demand at 130W vs 50W.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Radeon Pro WX 7130

2016

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro WX 7130: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro WX 7130 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 130W, a 80W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 6.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($1,000 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).

Trade-offs

❌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.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 6.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 8 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌160% higher power demand at 130W vs 50W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design better than Radeon Pro WX 7130?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 6,574 vs 6,406 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the overall package: you are getting a newer generation, no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (50W vs 130W).

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2016, the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 14nm. 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 Ti with Max-Q Design is the smarter buy by a wide margin. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $1,000 MSRP, and you are getting 2.6% higher G3D Mark. Radeon Pro WX 7130 really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

Is Radeon Pro WX 7130 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

No, not for a fresh gaming build. Radeon Pro WX 7130 is 2016 hardware with 8 GB of VRAM, 6,406 in G3D Mark, and FSR upscaling. That is simply too far behind to be an easy modern recommendation.

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 Ti with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro WX 7130 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
1080p
low	80 FPS	104 FPS
medium	68 FPS	88 FPS
high	57 FPS	76 FPS
ultra	38 FPS	50 FPS
1440p
low	70 FPS	90 FPS
medium	60 FPS	75 FPS
high	44 FPS	57 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	37 FPS
4K
low	25 FPS	36 FPS
medium	24 FPS	32 FPS
high	16 FPS	21 FPS
ultra	14 FPS	17 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro WX 7130

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
1080p
low	167 FPS	182 FPS
medium	142 FPS	160 FPS
high	110 FPS	130 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	104 FPS
1440p
low	122 FPS	133 FPS
medium	99 FPS	111 FPS
high	80 FPS	90 FPS
ultra	59 FPS	71 FPS
4K
low	71 FPS	74 FPS
medium	59 FPS	64 FPS
high	47 FPS	52 FPS
ultra	33 FPS	39 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro WX 7130

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
1080p
low	290 FPS	288 FPS
medium	237 FPS	231 FPS
high	197 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	148 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	222 FPS	216 FPS
medium	177 FPS	173 FPS
high	148 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	111 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	140 FPS	144 FPS
medium	118 FPS	115 FPS
high	84 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	53 FPS	72 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro WX 7130

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
1080p
low	147 FPS	248 FPS
medium	121 FPS	215 FPS
high	102 FPS	175 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	107 FPS	188 FPS
medium	88 FPS	165 FPS
high	75 FPS	129 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	107 FPS
4K
low	62 FPS	104 FPS
medium	48 FPS	85 FPS
high	38 FPS	67 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	54 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon Pro WX 7130

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon Pro WX 7130

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.

Radeon Pro WX 7130

The Radeon Pro WX 7130 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 10 2016. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1188 MHz to 1243 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,406 points. Launch price was $799.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Radeon Pro WX 7130 reaches 6,406 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon Pro WX 7130 uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2,304 (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 5.728 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1243 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
G3D Mark Score	6,574+3%	6,406
Architecture	Turing	GCN 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1024	2304+125%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	5.728 TFLOPS+133%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz	1243 MHz+4%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	144+125%
L1 Cache	1 MB+79%	0.56 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro WX 7130 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
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 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro WX 7130 has 8 GB. The Radeon Pro WX 7130 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2 MB (Radeon Pro WX 7130) — the Radeon Pro WX 7130 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (12_0) (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.4 (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 6.3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,HEVC (Radeon Pro WX 7130).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon Pro WX 7130
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.4
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 6.3
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon Pro WX 7130's 130W — a 88.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 350W (Radeon Pro WX 7130). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.