GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) vs RadeonT 780M

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 (Mobile)

2020

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.
❌233.3% higher power demand at 50W vs 15W.

RadeonT 780M

2024

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 50W, a 35W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

2020

RadeonT 780M

2024

Why buy it

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

Why buy it

✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
✅Draws 15W instead of 50W, a 35W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026) on 4nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌233.3% higher power demand at 50W vs 15W.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer clear downsides in this head-to-head, aside from the usual pricing and availability swings.

Quick Answers

So, is RadeonT 780M better than GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)?

Yes. RadeonT 780M is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 7,098 vs 6,968 in G3D Mark. On top of that, RadeonT 780M is a 2024 card with FSR upscaling, while GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is a 2020 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?

RadeonT 780M is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2024 generation instead of 2020, better upscaling support with FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, and a 4nm 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?

RadeonT 780M can still make sense if you find it at the right price, especially around Unknown MSRP. RadeonT 780M is still the smarter buy for most people, though, because the raw performance is close while the overall package is cleaner. RadeonT 780M is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 1.9% higher G3D Mark. Moving to an unclear MSRP gets you newer hardware, lower power draw (15W vs 50W), and FSR upscaling.

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

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is still a strong gaming card in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. Price is really the swing factor here. If you find it at or below an unclear MSRP, it remains a very sensible buy. RadeonT 780M is still the safer recommendation for most fresh builds because it offers a cleaner overall package with newer hardware and FSR upscaling.

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 (Mobile) Benchmark Check

RadeonT 780M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
1080p
low	115 FPS	93 FPS
medium	102 FPS	78 FPS
high	84 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	63 FPS	43 FPS
1440p
low	106 FPS	80 FPS
medium	90 FPS	68 FPS
high	71 FPS	51 FPS
ultra	52 FPS	32 FPS
4K
low	44 FPS	29 FPS
medium	40 FPS	27 FPS
high	28 FPS	18 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	16 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open RadeonT 780M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
1080p
low	150 FPS	98 FPS
medium	126 FPS	68 FPS
high	107 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	75 FPS	33 FPS
1440p
low	88 FPS	67 FPS
medium	68 FPS	45 FPS
high	52 FPS	33 FPS
ultra	39 FPS	24 FPS
4K
low	38 FPS	35 FPS
medium	28 FPS	25 FPS
high	22 FPS	19 FPS
ultra	17 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open RadeonT 780M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
1080p
low	314 FPS	319 FPS
medium	251 FPS	256 FPS
high	209 FPS	213 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	160 FPS
1440p
low	235 FPS	240 FPS
medium	188 FPS	192 FPS
high	157 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	118 FPS	120 FPS
4K
low	157 FPS	159 FPS
medium	125 FPS	128 FPS
high	104 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	70 FPS	77 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open RadeonT 780M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
1080p
low	283 FPS	214 FPS
medium	229 FPS	171 FPS
high	200 FPS	146 FPS
ultra	157 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	213 FPS	142 FPS
medium	170 FPS	117 FPS
high	138 FPS	101 FPS
ultra	115 FPS	75 FPS
4K
low	105 FPS	83 FPS
medium	81 FPS	67 FPS
high	70 FPS	54 FPS
ultra	55 FPS	38 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)Open RadeonT 780M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) and RadeonT 780M

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1485 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,968 points.

RadeonT 780M

The RadeonT 780M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2024. It features the RDNA 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 800 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 12 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,098 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) scores 6,968 and the RadeonT 780M reaches 7,098 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is built on Turing while the RadeonT 780M uses RDNA 3.0, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 768 (RadeonT 780M). Raw compute: 3.041 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 8.909 TFLOPS (RadeonT 780M). Boost clocks: 1485 MHz vs 2900 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
G3D Mark Score	6,968	7,098+2%
Architecture	Turing	RDNA 3.0
Process Node	12 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	1024+33%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.041 TFLOPS	8.909 TFLOPS+193%
Boost Clock	1485 MHz	2900 MHz+95%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64+33%	48
L1 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The RadeonT 780M relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 2 MB (RadeonT 780M) — the RadeonT 780M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 12.2 (RadeonT 780M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs VCN 4.0 (RadeonT 780M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th Gen vs VCN 4.0. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (RadeonT 780M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)	RadeonT 780M
Encoder	NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing)	VCN 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th Gen	VCN 4.0
Codecs	H.264,H.265,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) draws 50W versus the RadeonT 780M's 15W — a 107.7% difference. The RadeonT 780M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) vs 350W (RadeonT 780M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.