NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs AMD Radeon Pro W5700X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and AMD Radeon Pro W5700X videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Video outputs and ports. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Pro W5700X
- Around 20% higher core clock speed: 1243 MHz vs 1035 MHz
- Around 55% higher boost clock speed: 1855 MHz vs 1200 MHz
- 2.5x more pipelines: 2560 vs 1024
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 7 nm vs 12 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 16 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 17% higher memory clock speed: 14000 MHz vs 12000 MHz
- 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 17591 vs 6417
- 3.2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 1060 vs 335
- Around 11% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 43810 vs 39431
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16573 vs 9780
- Around 71% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 2168
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3364 vs 1982
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16573 vs 9780
- Around 71% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 2168
- Around 70% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3364 vs 1982
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1243 MHz vs 1035 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1855 MHz vs 1200 MHz |
| Pipelines | 2560 vs 1024 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 7 nm vs 12 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB vs 4 GB |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz vs 12000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 17591 vs 6417 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 1060 vs 335 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 43810 vs 39431 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 16573 vs 9780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 2168 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3364 vs 1982 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 16573 vs 9780 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 2168 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3364 vs 1982 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: AMD Radeon Pro W5700X
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | AMD Radeon Pro W5700X |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6417 | 17591 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 335 | 1060 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39431 | 43810 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9780 | 16573 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2168 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1982 | 3364 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9780 | 16573 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2168 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1982 | 3364 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3172 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | AMD Radeon Pro W5700X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | RDNA 1.0 |
| Code name | N18P-G62 | Navi 10 |
| Launch date | 16 Mar 2020 | Q3'2020 |
| Place in performance rating | 437 | 146 |
| Type | Laptop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1855 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1035 MHz | 1243 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 7 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 2560 |
| Compute units | 40 | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 17.79 TFLOPS (2:1) | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 9.5 TFLOPS | |
| Pixel fill rate | 123.5 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 277.9 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 205 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 10300 million | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | |
| Length | 12 inches (305 mm) | |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 550 Watt | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
| Width | Dual-slot | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | 14000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory bandwidth | 448 GB/s | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 4x Thunderbolt 3, 1x HDMI | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
ATIRadeon HD 4870 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDFirePro S10000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon HD 8830M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon R9 270X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDFirePro W7100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon E6465
