AMD Radeon RX 480 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
Comparison of graphics card architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters.
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors have no dedicated VRAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
Video outputs and ports
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.
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. 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.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
3DMark Fire Strike Score
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
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.
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.
This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various 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.
Cryptocurrency mining performance of Radeon RX 480 and GeForce GTX 1650. Usually measured in megahashes per second.
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
RX 480 satisfies 99% minimum and 94% recommended requirements of all games known to us.
GTX 1650 satisfies 97% minimum and 90% recommended requirements of all games known to us.
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
Advantages of AMD Radeon RX 480
11.2% better performance in benchmarks
Cheaper ($421 vs $561)
Wider memory bus (256 vs 128 bit)
More pipelines (2304 vs 896)
Higher memory bandwidth (224 vs 128 GB/s)
Vulkan (a contemporary API for graphics acceleration, based on now-discontinued Mantle)
Advantages of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
Much newer (23 April 2019 vs 29 June 2016)
Finer manufacturing process technology (12 vs 14 nm)
Lower power consumption (75W vs 150W), meaning that the rival with higher TDP might require a better cooler or other thermal solution.
So, which one is the better GPU?
Judging by the results of synthetic and gaming tests, Technical City recommends AMD Radeon RX 480, since it shows better performance.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
We selected several comparisons of video cards with performance more or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more probable options to consider.