GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 vs Radeon RX Vega 7

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking530not rated
Place by popularity12not in top-100
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeTU116
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)7 July 2020 (4 years ago)

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 cores448896
Core clock speedno data1410 MHz
Boost clock speed1800 MHz1590 MHz
Number of transistorsno data6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rateno data89.04
Floating-point processing powerno data2.849 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data56

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2020 7 July 2020
Chip lithography 7 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 80 Watt

RX Vega 7 has a 71.4% more advanced lithography process, and 433.3% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650 TU116, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 months.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 7 and GeForce GTX 1650 TU116. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 7 is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 TU116 is a desktop 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 RX Vega 7
Radeon RX Vega 7
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.


3.8 4891 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 7 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.