
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 5500
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 $30 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $179 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 110W, a 35W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 8,837).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌27.2% longer card at 229mm vs 180mm.
Radeon RX 5500
2019Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Measures 180mm instead of 229mm, a 49mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌20.1% HIGHER MSRP$179 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌46.7% higher power demand at 110W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon RX 5500
2019Why buy it
- ✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $179 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 110W, a 35W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅+12.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Measures 180mm instead of 229mm, a 49mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 8,837).
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌27.2% longer card at 229mm vs 180mm.
Trade-offs
- ❌20.1% HIGHER MSRP$179 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌46.7% higher power demand at 110W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon RX 5500 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 RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 106 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 45 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 94 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 61 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 35 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 32 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 29 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 20 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 17 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 113 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 79 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 54 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 37 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 76 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 47 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 34 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 25 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 36 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 19 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 14 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 349 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 304 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 238 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 198 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 285 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 239 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 199 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 149 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 176 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 151 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 74 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 170 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 140 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 124 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 97 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 121 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 100 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 69 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 69 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 34 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 5500

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 RX 5500
Radeon RX 5500
The Radeon RX 5500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 7 2019. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1845 MHz. It has 1408 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 110W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,837 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 5500's 8,837 — the Radeon RX 5500 leads by 12.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 5500 uses RDNA 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,408 (Radeon RX 5500). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.196 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 5500). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1845 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 8,837+12% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1408+57% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 5.196 TFLOPS+74% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1845 MHz+11% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 88+57% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 5500 is support for FSR Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.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 RX 5500 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR Frame Generation |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 224 GB/s (Radeon RX 5500) — a 75% advantage for the Radeon RX 5500. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 224 GB/s+75% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Radeon RX 5500). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 2.0 (Radeon RX 5500). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 2.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Radeon RX 5500).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 2.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 2.0 |
| 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 RX 5500's 110W — a 37.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 450W (Radeon RX 5500). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 180mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-32% | 110W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-33% | 450W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 180mm |
| Height | 111mm | 110mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+31% | 80.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon RX 5500 launched at $179. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 16.8% less ($30 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 49.4 (Radeon RX 5500) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 6.9% better value.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 5500 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-17% | $179 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+7% | 49.4 |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 14 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | October 7 2019 |
| Ranking | #323 | #297 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













