GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 vs Radeon R9 380

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking339not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation9.03no data
Power efficiency5.82no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameAntiguaTU116
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date18 June 2015 (9 years ago)7 July 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 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 cores1792896
Compute units28no data
Core clock speedno data1410 MHz
Boost clock speed970 MHz1590 MHz
Number of transistors5,000 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)190 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate108.689.04
Floating-point processing power3.476 TFLOPS2.849 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs11256

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length221 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Form factorfull height / full length / dual slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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
High bandwidth memory (HBM)-no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed970 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth182.4 GB/s192.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
ZeroCore+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan+1.2
Mantle+-
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 June 2015 7 July 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 190 Watt 80 Watt

GTX 1650 TU116 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 137.5% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 380 and GeForce GTX 1650 TU116. 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.


AMD Radeon R9 380
Radeon R9 380
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 TU116
GeForce GTX 1650 TU116

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.


4.1 795 votes

Rate Radeon R9 380 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 77 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 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.