Radeon RX 6400 vs GeForce GTX 1650 TU116

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated277
Place by popularitynot in top-10099
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data53.17
Power efficiencyno data25.78
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU116Navi 24
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 July 2020 (4 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$159

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 cores896768
Core clock speed1410 MHz1923 MHz
Boost clock speed1590 MHz2321 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt53 Watt
Texture fill rate89.04111.4
Floating-point processing power2.849 TFLOPS3.565 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs5648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s128.0 GB/s

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 DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan1.21.3
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 July 2020 19 January 2022
Chip lithography 12 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 53 Watt

RX 6400 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 50.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 and Radeon RX 6400. 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.

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 TU116
GeForce GTX 1650 TU116
AMD Radeon RX 6400
Radeon RX 6400

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 77 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1850 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6400 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.