Radeon Pro W5500X vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q

Place in the ranking	327	289
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	20.33
Power efficiency	23.14	10.61
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code name	TU117	Navi 14
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	2 April 2020 (4 years ago)	11 December 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$599

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	1024	1536
Core clock speed	1035 MHz	1187 MHz
Boost clock speed	1200 MHz	1757 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	125 Watt
Texture fill rate	76.80	168.7
Floating-point processing power	2.458 TFLOPS	5.398 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	96

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	224.0 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	No outputs	2x HDMI 2.0b
HDMI	-	+

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	1.2.140	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 Ti Max-Q 16.62

Pro W5500X 19.05
+14.6%

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 Ti Max-Q 6413

Pro W5500X 7350
+14.6%

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	57 −14%	65−70 +14%
1440p	34 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
4K	22 −9.1%	24−27 +9.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	9.22
1440p	no data	17.11
4K	no data	24.96

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

24−27

−3.8%

27−30
+3.8%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	49 −12.2%	55−60 +12.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	38 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	45 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −2.6%	40−45 +2.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −13.2%	120−130 +13.2%
Hitman 3	45 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn	80−85 −14.5%	95−100 +14.5%
Metro Exodus	86 −10.5%	95−100 +10.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2	63 −11.1%	70−75 +11.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	202 −13.9%	230−240 +13.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	35−40 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24 −12.5%	27−30 +12.5%
Battlefield 5	50−55 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	34 −2.9%	35−40 +2.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −2.6%	40−45 +2.6%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 −11.1%	50−55 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −13.2%	120−130 +13.2%
Hitman 3	43 −4.7%	45−50 +4.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	80−85 −14.5%	95−100 +14.5%
Metro Exodus	66 −13.6%	75−80 +13.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	46 −8.7%	50−55 +8.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	62 −12.9%	70−75 +12.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 −2.6%	40−45 +2.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	193 −14%	220−230 +14%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	22 −9.1%	24−27 +9.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Far Cry 5	35−40 −2.6%	40−45 +2.6%
Forza Horizon 4	100−110 −13.2%	120−130 +13.2%
Hitman 3	38 −5.3%	40−45 +5.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	57 −14%	65−70 +14%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	54 −11.1%	60−65 +11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

−8.7%

50−55
+8.7%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −8%	27−30 +8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12 +0%	12−14 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Far Cry 5	18−20 −10.5%	21−24 +10.5%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 −12.4%	100−105 +12.4%
Hitman 3	25 −8%	27−30 +8%
Horizon Zero Dawn	41 −9.8%	45−50 +9.8%
Metro Exodus	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35 −14.3%	40−45 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130 −7.7%	140−150 +7.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30

−11.1%

30−33
+11.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Hitman 3	14 −14.3%	16−18 +14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	85−90 −11.8%	95−100 +11.8%
Metro Exodus	16−18 −5.9%	18−20 +5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 −5%	21−24 +5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5 +0%	5−6 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Forza Horizon 4	21−24 −4.3%	24−27 +4.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21 −14.3%	24−27 +14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−6.7%

16−18
+6.7%

This is how GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and Pro W5500X compete in popular games:

Pro W5500X is 14% faster in 1080p
Pro W5500X is 3% faster in 1440p
Pro W5500X is 9% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	16.62	19.05
Recency	2 April 2020	11 December 2019
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	125 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has an age advantage of 3 months, and 150% lower power consumption.

Pro W5500X, on the other hand, has a 14.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W5500X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a notebook card while Radeon Pro W5500X is a workstation one.

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