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

✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 132W, a 57W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 240mm, a 11mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 17,121).
❌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 2.1 (2025).
❌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 52.8 vs 68.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

Radeon RX 9060

2025

Why buy it

✅+117.6% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 30.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 68.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1 (2025).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: RDNA 4.0 on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌76% higher power demand at 132W vs 75W.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Radeon RX 9060

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $100 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 132W, a 57W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 240mm, a 11mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅+117.6% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 30.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 68.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1 (2025).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: RDNA 4.0 on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 17,121).
❌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 2.1 (2025).
❌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 52.8 vs 68.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌76% higher power demand at 132W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

So, is Radeon RX 9060 better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Radeon RX 9060 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 17,121 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Radeon RX 9060 is a 2025 card with FSR Upscaling + Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1, while GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. 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 9060 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2025 generation instead of 2019, 117.6% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 8 GB instead of 4 GB, and better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack and better frame-generation support with FSR Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Radeon RX 9060 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. Radeon RX 9060 is about 67.1% more expensive on MSRP at $249 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 117.6% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 30.2%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong modern gaming GPU: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It remains a good buy when you can get it meaningfully cheaper than the alternative around $149 MSRP, even if Radeon RX 9060 is still the cleaner recommendation on overall value today.

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 9060 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
1080p
low	94 FPS	172 FPS
medium	83 FPS	152 FPS
high	70 FPS	132 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	112 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	144 FPS
medium	74 FPS	116 FPS
high	60 FPS	100 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	91 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	90 FPS
medium	39 FPS	77 FPS
high	27 FPS	61 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	54 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 9060

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
1080p
low	136 FPS	413 FPS
medium	113 FPS	344 FPS
high	94 FPS	251 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	186 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	245 FPS
medium	62 FPS	201 FPS
high	44 FPS	147 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	110 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	100 FPS
medium	27 FPS	80 FPS
high	21 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	47 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 9060

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
1080p
low	323 FPS	770 FPS
medium	283 FPS	616 FPS
high	205 FPS	514 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	578 FPS
medium	202 FPS	462 FPS
high	151 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	289 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	385 FPS
medium	117 FPS	308 FPS
high	79 FPS	257 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	193 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 9060

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
1080p
low	261 FPS	693 FPS
medium	211 FPS	596 FPS
high	191 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	385 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	554 FPS
medium	158 FPS	462 FPS
high	135 FPS	385 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	289 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	341 FPS
medium	74 FPS	304 FPS
high	65 FPS	257 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	193 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Radeon RX 9060

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 9060

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 9060

The Radeon RX 9060 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 5 2025. It features the RDNA 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1700 MHz to 2990 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 132W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 28 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 17,121 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon RX 9060's 17,121 — the Radeon RX 9060 leads by 117.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon RX 9060 uses RDNA 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,792 (Radeon RX 9060). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 21.43 TFLOPS (Radeon RX 9060). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2990 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
G3D Mark Score	7,869	17,121+118%
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	896	1792+100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	21.43 TFLOPS+618%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2990 MHz+80%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	112+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

A critical advantage for the Radeon RX 9060 is support for FSR Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1. 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 9060 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR Frame Generation + AFMF 2.1
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 9060 has 8 GB. The Radeon RX 9060 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 288 GB/s (Radeon RX 9060) — a 125% advantage for the Radeon RX 9060. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Radeon RX 9060) — the Radeon RX 9060 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	288 GB/s+125%
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Radeon RX 9060). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
DirectX	12	12.2+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 5.0 (Radeon RX 9060). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs VCN 5.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Radeon RX 9060).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	VCN 5.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	VCN 5.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon RX 9060's 132W — a 55.1% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 450W (Radeon RX 9060). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 240mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon RX 9060
TDP	75W-43%	132W
Recommended PSU	300W-33%	450W
Power Connector	None	8-pin
Length	229mm	240mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C	70°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	129.7+24%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Radeon RX 9060 launched at $249. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 40.2% less ($100 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 68.8 (Radeon RX 9060) — the Radeon RX 9060 offers 30.3% better value. The Radeon RX 9060 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).