GeForce RTX 4070 Ti vs ATI Radeon X1650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1650 and GeForce RTX 4070 Ti, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1650
2007
256 MB DDR2
0.18

RTX 4070 Ti outperforms ATI X1650 by a whopping 45833% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14045
Place by popularitynot in top-10091
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data48.97
Power efficiencyno data20.01
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameRV516AD104
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date20 November 2007 (17 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$799

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 data7680
Core clock speed635 MHz2310 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2610 MHz
Number of transistors107 million35,800 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data285 Watt
Texture fill rate2.540626.4
Floating-point processing powerno data40.09 TFLOPS
ROPs480
TMUs4240
Tensor Coresno data240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

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 x16
Lengthno data285 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 typeDDR2GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount256 MB12 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed392 MHz1313 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.272 GB/s504.2 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 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
OpenGL2.04.6
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 0.18
RTX 4070 Ti 82.68
+45833%

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 71
RTX 4070 Ti 31776
+44655%

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD0−1231
1440p-0−1150
4K-0−196

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.46
1440pno data5.33
4Kno data8.32

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 236
+0%
236
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 109
+0%
109
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 575
+0%
575
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Metro Exodus 173
+0%
173
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+0%
93
+0%
Dota 2 205
+0%
205
+0%
Far Cry 5 152
+0%
152
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 473
+0%
473
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 178
+0%
178
+0%
Metro Exodus 163
+0%
163
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 83
+0%
83
+0%
Dota 2 243
+0%
243
+0%
Far Cry 5 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 410
+0%
410
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 156
+0%
156
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 156
+0%
156
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
World of Tanks 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 53
+0%
53
+0%
Far Cry 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 280
+0%
280
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 148
+0%
148
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Valorant 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Dota 2 172
+0%
172
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 172
+0%
172
+0%
Metro Exodus 84
+0%
84
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 172
+0%
172
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Dota 2 226
+0%
226
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140
+0%
140
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.18 82.68
Recency 20 November 2007 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 12 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 4 nm

RTX 4070 Ti has a 45833.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1900% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 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
Radeon X1650
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti

Other comparisons

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 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 7218 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4070 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.