Radeon Pro WX 4200 vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking206not rated
Place by popularity56not in top-100
Power efficiency18.21no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)no data
GPU code nameTU116no data
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date22 November 2019 (4 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

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 cores1280no data
Core clock speed1530 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1725 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,600 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nmno data
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattno data
Texture fill rate138.0no data
Floating-point processing power4.416 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed12000 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
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.

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and Radeon Pro WX 4200. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while Radeon Pro WX 4200 is a workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
AMD Radeon Pro WX 4200
Radeon Pro WX 4200

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 4676 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Pro WX 4200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.