GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon Vega 3 Embedded

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated264
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data39.58
Power efficiencyno data18.92
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code namePicasso-MTU117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2019 (5 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

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 cores192896
Core clock speed300 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz1665 MHz
Number of transistors4,940 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate14.4093.24
Floating-point processing power0.4608 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1256

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsMotherboard Dependent1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.76.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.11.2
Vulkan1.31.2.131
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 75 Watt

Vega 3 Embedded has 650% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 3 Embedded and GeForce GTX 1650. 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 Vega 3 Embedded
Radeon Vega 3 Embedded
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

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.


3.1 82 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 3 Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23054 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.