Radeon RX 5900 XT vs GeForce GTX 1650

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking266not rated
Place by popularity3not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.19no data
Power efficiency18.91no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameTU117Navi 21
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

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 cores8964352
Core clock speed1485 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1665 MHz1735 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million21,000 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate93.24471.9
Floating-point processing power2.984 TFLOPS15.1 TFLOPS
ROPs3296
TMUs56272

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 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB12 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s672.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 12 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 300 Watt

GTX 1650 has 300% lower power consumption.

RX 5900 XT, on the other hand, has a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon RX 5900 XT. 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
GeForce GTX 1650
AMD Radeon RX 5900 XT
Radeon RX 5900 XT

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.


3.8 23317 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 67 votes

Rate Radeon RX 5900 XT 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.