GTX 1650 SUPER vs 210
Comparison of graphics card architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters.
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Competitors of GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER from AMD
We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER from AMD is Radeon R9 FURY X.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER:
Competitors of GeForce 210 from AMD
We believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce 210 from AMD is Radeon HD 8310E.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce 210:
Advantages of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Much newer (29 October 2019 vs 12 October 2009)
Wider memory bus (128 vs 64 bit)
More pipelines (1408 vs 16)
Higher memory bandwidth (192 vs 8 GB/s)
Finer manufacturing process technology (12 vs 40 nm)
Advantages of NVIDIA GeForce 210
Cheaper ($63 vs $539)
Lower power consumption (30W vs 100W), meaning that the rival with higher TDP might require a better cooler or other thermal solution.
CUDA (Compute Unified Device Architecture - an API for video card computing power usage in tasks different from 3D graphics processing. Can be used for physics simulation for instance)
So, which one is the better GPU?
Technical City couldn't decide between NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and NVIDIA GeForce 210. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
We selected several comparisons of video cards with performance more or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more probable options to consider.