GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon HD 6990M

Place in the ranking	610	264
Place by popularity	not in top-100	3
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	39.45
Power efficiency	3.63	18.84
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Blackcomb	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	12 July 2011 (13 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149

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	1120	896
Core clock speed	715 MHz	1485 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1665 MHz
Number of transistors	1,700 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	40.04	93.24
Floating-point processing power	1.602 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	56

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	115.2 GB/s	128.0 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.0	6.5
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
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.

HD 6990M 5.24

GTX 1650 20.40
+289%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 6990M 3227

GTX 1650 13645
+323%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD 6990M 15113

GTX 1650 44694
+196%

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:

900p	54 −289%	210−220 +289%
Full HD	58 −15.5%	67 +15.5%
1440p	9−10 −311%	37 +311%
4K	6−7 −300%	24 +300%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.22
1440p	no data	4.03
4K	no data	6.21

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

9−10

−256%

30−35
+256%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −279%	53 +279%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −683%	47 +683%
Battlefield 5	14−16 −464%	79 +464%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −373%	52 +373%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −482%	64 +482%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −433%	80 +433%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −594%	229 +594%
Hitman 3	10−12 −345%	49 +345%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −785%	292 +785%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −677%	101 +677%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −450%	77 +450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −505%	115 +505%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −377%	224 +377%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −493%	83 +493%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −483%	35 +483%
Battlefield 5	14−16 −414%	72 +414%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 −318%	46 +318%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −373%	52 +373%
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16 −273%	56 +273%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −509%	201 +509%
Hitman 3	10−12 −327%	47 +327%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −688%	260 +688%
Metro Exodus	12−14 −446%	71 +446%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 −293%	55 +293%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −289%	74 +289%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −156%	45−50 +156%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 −338%	206 +338%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16 −78.6%	25 +78.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7 −117%	13 +117%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +37.5%	8 −37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10 −256%	30−35 +256%
Far Cry 5	10−12 −255%	39 +255%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 −97%	65 +97%
Hitman 3	10−12 −273%	41 +273%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −81.8%	60 +81.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 −226%	62 +226%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 −133%	42 +133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +124%	21 −124%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−286%

54
+286%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 −320%	42 +320%
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9 −350%	36 +350%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −260%	18 +260%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	13
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −360%	21−24 +360%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −500%	12−14 +500%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −300%	24 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −838%	122 +838%
Hitman 3	9−10 −200%	27 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −258%	43 +258%
Metro Exodus	3−4 −1267%	41 +1267%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −500%	24−27 +500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −339%	145 +339%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

−289%

35
+289%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 −400%	20 +400%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −467%	17 +467%
Hitman 3	1−2 −1200%	13 +1200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	9−10 −356%	41 +356%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −1250%	27 +1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −2500%	26 +2500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −333%	13 +333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3 −150%	5 +150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −450%	10−12 +450%
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	4−5
Far Cry 5	3−4 −300%	12 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −650%	30 +650%
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3 −300%	8 +300%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

−183%

17
+183%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

+0%

This is how HD 6990M and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 is 289% faster in 900p
GTX 1650 is 16% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 is 311% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 is 300% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 6990M is 124% faster.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 is 2500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 6990M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
GTX 1650 is ahead in 66 tests (94%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.24	20.40
Recency	12 July 2011	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	75 Watt

GTX 1650 has a 289.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6990M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6990M is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.

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