Radeon Pro VII vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

Place in the ranking	211	163
Place by popularity	57	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	16.33
Power efficiency	18.20	9.23
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	TU116	Vega 20
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	22 November 2019 (5 years ago)	13 May 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$1,899

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1280	3840
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	1400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1725 MHz	1700 MHz
Number of transistors	6,600 million	13,230 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	250 Watt
Texture fill rate	138.0	408.0
Floating-point processing power	4.416 TFLOPS	13.06 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	80	240

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	305 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory type	GDDR6	HBM2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	4096 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	1000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	1024 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

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.

Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	6x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready	+	no data
Multi Monitor	+	no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.5	6.7
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.3
CUDA	7.5	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.44

Pro VII 33.53
+26.8%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of 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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 10165

Pro VII 12890
+26.8%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD	70 −21.4%	85−90 +21.4%
1440p	36 −25%	45−50 +25%
4K	23 −17.4%	27−30 +17.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	22.34
1440p	no data	42.20
4K	no data	70.33

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	61 −23%	75−80 +23%
Cyberpunk 2077	63 −19%	75−80 +19%
Elden Ring	76 −25%	95−100 +25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −25%	100−105 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	48 −25%	60−65 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	47 −17%	55−60 +17%
Forza Horizon 4	121 −24%	150−160 +24%
Metro Exodus	89 −23.6%	110−120 +23.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	84 −19%	100−105 +19%
Valorant	115 −21.7%	140−150 +21.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −25%	100−105 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	39 −15.4%	45−50 +15.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 −18.4%	45−50 +18.4%
Dota 2	138 −23.2%	170−180 +23.2%
Elden Ring	82 −22%	100−105 +22%
Far Cry 5	151 −25.8%	190−200 +25.8%
Fortnite	130−140 −23.1%	160−170 +23.1%
Forza Horizon 4	101 −18.8%	120−130 +18.8%
Grand Theft Auto V	103 −26.2%	130−140 +26.2%
Metro Exodus	61 −23%	75−80 +23%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −22.7%	200−210 +22.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	85−90 −26.4%	110−120 +26.4%
Valorant	100−110 −22.6%	130−140 +22.6%
World of Tanks	260−270 −14.1%	300−310 +14.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 −25%	100−105 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	35 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 −25%	40−45 +25%
Dota 2	191 −25.7%	240−250 +25.7%
Far Cry 5	75−80 −26.6%	100−105 +26.6%
Forza Horizon 4	83 −20.5%	100−105 +20.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 −22.7%	200−210 +22.7%
Valorant	100−110 −22.6%	130−140 +22.6%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%
Elden Ring	31 −12.9%	35−40 +12.9%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −25.7%	220−230 +25.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	11 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
World of Tanks	170−180 −26.4%	220−230 +26.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 −22.6%	65−70 +22.6%
Counter-Strike 2	20 −20%	24−27 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	19 −26.3%	24−27 +26.3%
Far Cry 5	75−80 −21.8%	95−100 +21.8%
Forza Horizon 4	60 −25%	75−80 +25%
Metro Exodus	55 −18.2%	65−70 +18.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −15.4%	45−50 +15.4%
Valorant	70−75 −25%	90−95 +25%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10 −20%	12−14 +20%
Dota 2	45 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%
Elden Ring	17 −23.5%	21−24 +23.5%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%
Metro Exodus	16 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 −23.5%	100−105 +23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 −23.5%	21−24 +23.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45 −22.2%	55−60 +22.2%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 −25%	35−40 +25%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27 −25%	30−33 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 −20%	6−7 +20%
Dota 2	80 −25%	100−105 +25%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%
Fortnite	30−35 −21.2%	40−45 +21.2%
Forza Horizon 4	30 −16.7%	35−40 +16.7%
Valorant	35−40 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and Pro VII compete in popular games:

Pro VII is 21% faster in 1080p
Pro VII is 25% faster in 1440p
Pro VII is 17% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	26.44	33.53
Recency	22 November 2019	13 May 2020
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	250 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has 150% lower power consumption.

Pro VII, on the other hand, has a 26.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 months, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro VII is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while Radeon Pro VII is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.