GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Radeon PRO W7500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Radeon PRO W7500 Radeon PRO W7600 Radeon PRO W7700 Radeon PRO W7800 Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB Radeon PRO W7900
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1650 Mobile GTX 1650 Max-Q GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q MX450 25W MX450 30.5W 8Gbps MX450 30.5W 10Gbps T400 Mobile

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7500 with GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7500
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
29.55
+112%

PRO W7500 outperforms GTX 1650 Max-Q by a whopping 112% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

PRO W7500 PRO W7500
GTX 1650 Max-Q GTX 1650 Max-Q

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking156345
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation100.00no data
Power efficiency33.3436.65
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNavi 33TU117
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (1 year ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores17921024
Core clock speed1500 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1125 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate190.472.00
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPS2.304 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs11264
Ray Tracing Cores28no 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1344 MHz1751 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.0 GB/s112.1 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR+-

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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.21.2
Vulkan1.31.2.140
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.

PRO W7500 29.55
+112%
GTX 1650 Max-Q 13.92

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.

PRO W7500 13207
+112%
GTX 1650 Max-Q 6221

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 HD120−130
+100%
60
−100%
1440p60−65
+100%
30
−100%
4K35−40
+94.4%
18
−94.4%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.58no data
1440p7.15no data
4K12.26no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 64
+0%
64
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 138
+0%
138
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 74
+0%
74
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85
+0%
85
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 167
+0%
167
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 94
+0%
94
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 80
+0%
80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 69
+0%
69
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+0%
56
+0%
Metro Exodus 28
+0%
28
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 71
+0%
71
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+0%
53
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+0%
55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
+0%
53
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 59
+0%
59
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 16
+0%
16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 36
+0%
36
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 36
+0%
36
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+0%
17
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 11
+0%
11
+0%

This is how PRO W7500 and GTX 1650 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7500 is 100% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7500 is 100% faster in 1440p
  • PRO W7500 is 94% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 29.55 13.92
Recency 3 August 2023 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 30 Watt

PRO W7500 has a 112.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 1650 Max-Q, on the other hand, has 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is a notebook one.

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.

AMD Radeon PRO W7500
Radeon PRO W7500
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

PRO W7500 Radeon PRO W7500
vs
Pro WX 8200 Radeon Pro WX 8200
GTX 1650 Max-Q GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
vs
MX570 A GeForce MX570 A
PRO W7500 Radeon PRO W7500
vs
Pro W6600X Radeon Pro W6600X
RX 7600 AMD RX 7600
vs
ATI HD 4890 4890
RX 7600 AMD RX 7600
vs
GeForce4 MX 440-SE 440-SE
RTX 5000 Ada Generation RTX 5000 Ada Generation
vs
Apple M3 Max 30-Core GPU 30-Core GPU
RTX 5000 Ada Generation RTX 5000 Ada Generation
vs
Apple M3 Pro 14-Core GPU 14-Core GPU
RTX 5000 Ada Generation RTX 5000 Ada Generation
vs
RTX 5000 Embedded Ada Generation 5000 Embedded Ada Generation
PRO W7600 AMD PRO W7600
vs
T1000 Mobile T1000 Mobile
RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
Jetson Orin NX 16 GB NX 16 GB
RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 5000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
GTX 1080 Ti 12 GB 1080 Ti 12 GB
RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile
vs
RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Embedded 5000 Mobile Ada Embedded
UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N) UHD Graphics 24EUs (Alder Lake-N)
vs
GT 425M 425M

Community ratings

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

4.1 17 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 671 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7500 or GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.