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

✅+22.6% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌114.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 35W.

Radeon RX 6300M

2022

Why buy it

✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 35W instead of 75W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (6,421 vs 7,869).
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon RX 6300M

2022

Why buy it

✅+22.6% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Why buy it

✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 35W instead of 75W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌114.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 35W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (6,421 vs 7,869).
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon RX 6300M?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 7,869 vs 6,421 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon RX 6300M is a 2022 model from an older generation with FSR 3 + AFMF. 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 RX 6300M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2022 generation instead of 2019, better upscaling support with FSR 3 (2023) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack and better frame-generation support with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 6nm process instead of 12nm. 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 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 1650 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $149 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 22.6% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%. Radeon RX 6300M is the newer 2022 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture, lower power draw (35W vs 75W), and future-proofing than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon RX 6300M make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon RX 6300M is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (35W vs 75W), future-proofing, and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 1650. The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 1650 currently gives you 22.6% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

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 RX 6300M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
1080p
low	94 FPS	129 FPS
medium	83 FPS	115 FPS
high	70 FPS	98 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	73 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	118 FPS
medium	74 FPS	99 FPS
high	60 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	62 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	49 FPS
medium	39 FPS	46 FPS
high	27 FPS	34 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	30 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 6300M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
1080p
low	136 FPS	158 FPS
medium	113 FPS	124 FPS
high	94 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	59 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	104 FPS
medium	62 FPS	81 FPS
high	44 FPS	60 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	41 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	53 FPS
medium	27 FPS	41 FPS
high	21 FPS	32 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	20 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 6300M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
1080p
low	323 FPS	289 FPS
medium	283 FPS	231 FPS
high	205 FPS	193 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	217 FPS
medium	202 FPS	173 FPS
high	151 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	133 FPS
medium	117 FPS	116 FPS
high	79 FPS	82 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	54 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 6300M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
1080p
low	261 FPS	257 FPS
medium	211 FPS	191 FPS
high	191 FPS	169 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	141 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	191 FPS
medium	158 FPS	138 FPS
high	135 FPS	124 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	100 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	100 FPS
medium	74 FPS	74 FPS
high	65 FPS	64 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	50 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 6300M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 6300M

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 6300M

The Radeon RX 6300M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2000 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,421 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 6300M's 6,421 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 22.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6300M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 768 (Radeon RX 6300M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.686 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6300M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2400 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
G3D Mark Score	7,869+23%	6,421
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	6 nm
Shading Units	896+17%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	3.686 TFLOPS+24%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2400 MHz+44%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56+17%	48
L1 Cache	896 KB+250%	256 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6300M is support for FSR Frame Generation + AFMF. 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 6300M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR 3
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR Frame Generation + AFMF
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 64 GB/s (Radeon RX 6300M) — a 100% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 32-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s+100%	64 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit+300%	32-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Radeon RX 6300M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
DirectX	12	12 Ultimate
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Navi 24 Media. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC (Radeon RX 6300M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 6300M
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	—
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	Navi 24 Media
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,H.265/HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6300M's 35W — a 72.7% difference. The Radeon RX 6300M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon RX 6300M). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70°C.