GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 7100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro WX 7100 with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

Pro WX 7100
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 130 Watt
20.31
+21.8%

Pro WX 7100 outperforms GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q by a significant 22% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking270327
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.71no data
Power efficiency10.7222.89
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameEllesmereTU117
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date10 November 2016 (8 years ago)2 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 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 cores23041024
Core clock speed1188 MHz1035 MHz
Boost clock speed1243 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors5,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate179.076.80
Floating-point processing power5.728 TFLOPS2.458 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs14464

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 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

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 amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1750 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth224.0 GB/s160.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPortNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
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. 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 WX 7100 20.31
+21.8%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 16.68

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 WX 7100 7825
+21.8%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 6427

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 HD65−70
+14%
57
−14%
1440p40−45
+17.6%
34
−17.6%
4K24−27
+9.1%
22
−9.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.29no data
1440p19.98no data
4K33.29no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+26.9%
24−27
−26.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
−8.9%
49
+8.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
−11.8%
38
+11.8%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+24.1%
50−55
−24.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
−9.8%
45
+9.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+26.9%
24−27
−26.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+23.1%
35−40
−23.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+22.2%
45−50
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+18.9%
100−110
−18.9%
Hitman 3 40−45
−12.5%
45
+12.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+18.1%
80−85
−18.1%
Metro Exodus 70−75
−21.1%
86
+21.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
−14.5%
63
+14.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+25.9%
50−55
−25.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
−117%
202
+117%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+18.4%
35−40
−18.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+41.7%
24
−41.7%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+24.1%
50−55
−24.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+20.6%
34
−20.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+26.9%
24−27
−26.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+23.1%
35−40
−23.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60
+22.2%
45−50
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+18.9%
100−110
−18.9%
Hitman 3 40−45
−7.5%
43
+7.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+18.1%
80−85
−18.1%
Metro Exodus 70−75
+7.6%
66
−7.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+19.6%
46
−19.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+9.7%
62
−9.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+17.9%
35−40
−17.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
−108%
193
+108%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+137%
19
−137%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+183%
12
−183%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+86.4%
22
−86.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+26.9%
24−27
−26.9%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+23.1%
35−40
−23.1%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+18.9%
100−110
−18.9%
Hitman 3 40−45
+5.3%
38
−5.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+71.9%
57
−71.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+25.9%
54
−25.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+43.8%
32
−43.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 90−95
+481%
16
−481%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 55−60
+19.6%
46
−19.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+21.9%
30−35
−21.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+24%
24−27
−24%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+58.3%
12
−58.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+26.3%
18−20
−26.3%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+28.1%
85−90
−28.1%
Hitman 3 24−27
−4.2%
25
+4.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+2.4%
41
−2.4%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+26.7%
30−33
−26.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+20%
35
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
−8.3%
130
+8.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+25.9%
27−30
−25.9%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Hitman 3 16−18
+14.3%
14
−14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 100−110
+24.7%
85−90
−24.7%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+29.4%
16−18
−29.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+5%
20
−5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+100%
5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+21.7%
21−24
−21.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+9.5%
21
−9.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%

This is how Pro WX 7100 and GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is 14% faster in 1080p
  • Pro WX 7100 is 18% faster in 1440p
  • Pro WX 7100 is 9% 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 Pro WX 7100 is 481% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is 117% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Pro WX 7100 is ahead in 61 test (85%)
  • GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is ahead in 11 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.31 16.68
Recency 10 November 2016 2 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 50 Watt

Pro WX 7100 has a 21.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 16.7% more advanced lithography process, and 160% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro WX 7100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro WX 7100 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a notebook one.


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.


AMD Radeon Pro WX 7100
Radeon Pro WX 7100
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q

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.


3.9 55 votes

Rate Radeon Pro WX 7100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 210 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 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.