GeForce RTX 4060 Ti vs ATI Radeon X1650 PRO

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1650 PRO and GeForce RTX 4060 Ti, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1650 PRO
2007
256 MB GDDR3, 44 Watt
0.22

RTX 4060 Ti outperforms ATI X1650 PRO by a whopping 26877% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking137434
Place by popularitynot in top-10014
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data83.14
Power efficiency0.3425.42
ArchitectureUltra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameRV530AD106
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 February 2007 (17 years ago)18 May 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$399

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 coresno data4352
Core clock speed600 MHz2310 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2535 MHz
Number of transistors157 million22,900 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)44 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate2.400344.8
Floating-point processing powerno data22.06 TFLOPS
ROPs448
TMUs4136
Tensor Coresno data136
Ray Tracing Coresno data34

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data240 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 16-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s288.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9

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.

ATI X1650 PRO 0.22
RTX 4060 Ti 59.35
+26877%

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.

ATI X1650 PRO 84
RTX 4060 Ti 22865
+27120%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.22 59.35
Recency 1 February 2007 18 May 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 8 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 44 Watt 160 Watt

ATI X1650 PRO has 263.6% lower power consumption.

RTX 4060 Ti, on the other hand, has a 26877.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1700% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 PRO in performance tests.


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.


ATI Radeon X1650 PRO
Radeon X1650 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4060 Ti
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti

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.


3.3 69 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 8634 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 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.