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 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Why buy it

✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon RX Vega M GH: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon RX Vega M GH is already obsolete for modern gaming.
✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Radeon RX Vega M GH

2018

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2018-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Radeon RX Vega M GH

2018

Why buy it

✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon RX Vega M GH: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon RX Vega M GH is already obsolete for modern gaming.
✅Draws 50W instead of 100W, a 50W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2018-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌100% higher power demand at 100W vs 50W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design better than Radeon RX Vega M GH?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 6,574 vs 6,548 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is a 2020 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Radeon RX Vega M GH is a 2018 model from an older generation with FSR upscaling. 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?

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2018, more VRAM at 4 GB instead of Unknown, the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling, and a 12nm process instead of 14nm. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.

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

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design can still make sense if you find it at the right price, especially around Unknown MSRP. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is still the smarter buy for most people, though, because the raw performance is close while the overall package is cleaner. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 0.4% higher G3D Mark. Moving to an unclear MSRP gets you newer hardware, lower power draw (50W vs 100W), and no meaningful modern upscaling stack.

Is Radeon RX Vega M GH still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. Radeon RX Vega M GH is still a strong gaming card in 2026: it is still fine for 1080p, but 1440p and especially 4K require more compromise. Price is really the swing factor here. If you find it at or below an unclear MSRP, it remains a very sensible buy. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is still the safer recommendation for most fresh builds because it offers a cleaner overall package with newer hardware and no meaningful modern upscaling stack.

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 Ti with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Radeon RX Vega M GH Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
1080p
low	80 FPS	82 FPS
medium	68 FPS	70 FPS
high	57 FPS	60 FPS
ultra	38 FPS	40 FPS
1440p
low	70 FPS	72 FPS
medium	60 FPS	63 FPS
high	44 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	30 FPS
4K
low	25 FPS	26 FPS
medium	24 FPS	24 FPS
high	16 FPS	17 FPS
ultra	14 FPS	14 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon RX Vega M GH

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
1080p
low	167 FPS	201 FPS
medium	142 FPS	168 FPS
high	110 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	93 FPS
1440p
low	122 FPS	148 FPS
medium	99 FPS	124 FPS
high	80 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	59 FPS	69 FPS
4K
low	71 FPS	78 FPS
medium	59 FPS	66 FPS
high	47 FPS	55 FPS
ultra	33 FPS	39 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon RX Vega M GH

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
1080p
low	290 FPS	295 FPS
medium	237 FPS	236 FPS
high	197 FPS	196 FPS
ultra	148 FPS	147 FPS
1440p
low	222 FPS	221 FPS
medium	177 FPS	177 FPS
high	148 FPS	147 FPS
ultra	111 FPS	110 FPS
4K
low	140 FPS	147 FPS
medium	118 FPS	118 FPS
high	84 FPS	98 FPS
ultra	53 FPS	73 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon RX Vega M GH

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
1080p
low	147 FPS	148 FPS
medium	121 FPS	122 FPS
high	102 FPS	106 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	90 FPS
1440p
low	107 FPS	109 FPS
medium	88 FPS	90 FPS
high	75 FPS	78 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	65 FPS
4K
low	62 FPS	63 FPS
medium	48 FPS	50 FPS
high	38 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	29 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Radeon RX Vega M GH

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Radeon RX Vega M GH

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.

Radeon RX Vega M GH

The Radeon RX Vega M GH is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 1 2018. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1063 MHz to 1190 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,548 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Radeon RX Vega M GH reaches 6,548 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Radeon RX Vega M GH uses GCN 4.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1,536 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3.656 TFLOPS (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1190 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
G3D Mark Score	6,574	6,548
Architecture	Turing	GCN 4.0
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1024	1536+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	3.656 TFLOPS+49%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz	1190 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	64	96+50%
L1 Cache	1 MB+163%	0.38 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon RX Vega M GH relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX Vega M GH has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 204.8 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega M GH) — a 6.7% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega M GH. Bus width: 128-bit vs 1024-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR6	HBM2
Memory Bandwidth	192 GB/s	204.8 GB/s+7%
Bus Width	128-bit	1024-bit+700%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12_1 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12_1
Max Displays	4	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs UVD 6.3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Radeon RX Vega M GH
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	VCE 3.0
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	UVD 6.3
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Radeon RX Vega M GH's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1W (Radeon RX Vega M GH). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Integrated.