
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 6500M
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
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.
Radeon RX 6500M
2022Why buy it
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon RX 6500M
2022Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 6nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
- ✅Draws 50W instead of 75W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
- ❌50% higher power demand at 75W vs 50W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Radeon RX 6500M?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon RX 6500M make more sense than GeForce GTX 1650?
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 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 52 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 48 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 31 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 179 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 139 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 103 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 116 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 89 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 67 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 47 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 57 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 44 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 35 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 24 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 335 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 268 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 223 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 167 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 251 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 201 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 167 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 126 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 167 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 134 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 107 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 74 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 303 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 233 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 205 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 167 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 222 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 165 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 137 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 109 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 109 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 82 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 71 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 55 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 6500M

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 6500M
Radeon RX 6500M
The Radeon RX 6500M 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 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,443 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 6500M's 7,443 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 5.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6500M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,024 (Radeon RX 6500M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.915 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6500M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2400 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+6% | 7,443 |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1024+14% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 4.915 TFLOPS+65% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2400 MHz+44% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 64+14% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+250% | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6500M 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 6500M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 144 GB/s (Radeon RX 6500M) — a 12.5% advantage for the Radeon RX 6500M. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 144 GB/s+13% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_2) (Radeon RX 6500M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_2) |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs VCN 3.0 (Radeon RX 6500M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 3.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) (Radeon RX 6500M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | VCN 3.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | VCN 3.0 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Decode Only) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6500M's 50W — a 40% difference. The Radeon RX 6500M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon RX 6500M). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 50W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 148.9+42% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6500M is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6500M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 24 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #341 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













