
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

Radeon RX 6600M
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/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon RX 6600M across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Radeon RX 6600M
2021Why buy it
- ✅82.7% more average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Radeon RX 6600M
2021Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅82.7% more average FPS across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon RX 6600M across 47 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like FSR Frame Generation + AFMF (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is Radeon RX 6600M 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 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 167 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 148 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 131 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 111 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 140 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 113 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 101 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 84 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 71 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 58 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 50 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 300 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 250 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 196 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 154 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 192 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 160 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 127 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 102 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 104 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 86 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 73 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 55 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 626 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 501 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 418 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 313 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 470 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 376 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 313 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 235 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 313 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 251 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 206 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 157 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 473 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 394 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 330 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 277 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 371 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 306 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 243 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 198 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 212 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 171 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 160 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 124 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 6600M

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 6600M
Radeon RX 6600M
The Radeon RX 6600M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 31 2021. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2068 MHz to 2416 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,922 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 6600M's 13,922 — the Radeon RX 6600M leads by 76.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 6600M uses RDNA 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,792 (Radeon RX 6600M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.659 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 6600M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2416 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 13,922+77% |
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 1792+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 8.659 TFLOPS+190% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2416 MHz+45% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 56 | 112+100% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+75% | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 6600M 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 6600M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX 6600M has 8 GB. The Radeon RX 6600M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 224 GB/s (Radeon RX 6600M) — a 75% advantage for the Radeon RX 6600M. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (Radeon RX 6600M) — the Radeon RX 6600M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 224 GB/s+75% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (FL 12_2) (Radeon RX 6600M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (FL 12_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 3.0 (Radeon RX 6600M). 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,AV1 (Radeon RX 6600M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| 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,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 6600M's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Radeon RX 6600M). Power connectors: None vs Mobile.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-25% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 139.2+33% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX 6600M is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 6600M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | Navi 23 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | May 31 2021 |
| Ranking | #323 | #173 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













