GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs Radeon Pro W6600X

Place in the ranking	154	206
Place by popularity	not in top-100	56
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	51.31	no data
Power efficiency	19.58	18.21
Architecture	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Navi 23	TU116
Market segment	Workstation	Desktop
Release date	3 August 2021 (3 years ago)	22 November 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$699	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 cores	2048	1280
Core clock speed	2068 MHz	1530 MHz
Boost clock speed	2479 MHz	1725 MHz
Number of transistors	11,060 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	100 Watt
Texture fill rate	317.3	138.0
Floating-point processing power	10.15 TFLOPS	4.416 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	32
TMUs	128	80
Ray Tracing Cores	32	no 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).

Interface	PCIe 4.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-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 type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	256.0 GB/s	192.0 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	-	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready	no data	+
Multi Monitor	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_2)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.7	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.1	1.2
Vulkan	1.3	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.

Pro W6600X 33.99
+29%

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.34

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 W6600X 13113
+29%

GTX 1650 SUPER 10162

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	90−95 +26.8%	71 −26.8%
1440p	45−50 +21.6%	37 −21.6%
4K	27−30 +22.7%	22 −22.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	7.77	no data
1440p	15.53	no data
4K	25.89	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	53 +0%	53 +0%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	50 +0%	50 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Hitman 3	62 +0%	62 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Metro Exodus	69 +0%	69 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	84 +0%	84 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	180 +0%	180 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	26 +0%	26 +0%
Battlefield 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40 +0%	40 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Hitman 3	59 +0%	59 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Metro Exodus	82 +0%	82 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	101 +0%	101 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	180 +0%	180 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	15 +0%	15 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 +0%	34 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Hitman 3	53 +0%	53 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	83 +0%	83 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	83 +0%	83 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50 +0%	50 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	21 +0%	21 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	13 +0%	13 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	20 +0%	20 +0%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%
Hitman 3	34 +0%	34 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60 +0%	60 +0%
Metro Exodus	55 +0%	55 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	60 +0%	60 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	164 +0%	164 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Hitman 3	34 +0%	34 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Metro Exodus	32 +0%	32 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 +0%	32 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5 +0%	5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 +0%	3 +0%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30 +0%	30 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	8 +0%	8 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how Pro W6600X and GTX 1650 SUPER compete in popular games:

Pro W6600X is 27% faster in 1080p
Pro W6600X is 22% faster in 1440p
Pro W6600X is 23% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.99	26.34
Recency	3 August 2021	22 November 2019
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	7 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	100 Watt

Pro W6600X has a 29% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 1650 SUPER, on the other hand, has 20% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro W6600X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W6600X is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop one.

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