NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs AMD Radeon RX 590

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and AMD Radeon RX 590 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 0 month(s) later
• Around 4% higher core clock speed: 1530 MHz vs 1469 MHz
• Around 12% higher boost clock speed: 1725 MHz vs 1545 MHz
• Around 75% lower typical power consumption: 100 Watt vs 175 Watt
• Around 8% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10162 vs 9390
• Around 21% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 55772 vs 45917
• Around 29% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 178.014 vs 137.469
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 787.025 vs 762.142
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13569 vs 13383
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13569 vs 13383

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX 590

• Around 61% higher texture fill rate: 222.48 GTexel/s vs 138.0 GTexel/s
• 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
• Around 5% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 789 vs 750
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2083.862 vs 1961.932
• Around 11% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 12.352 vs 11.169
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 139.477 vs 109.29
• Around 2% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 4757 vs 4663

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GPU 2: AMD Radeon RX 590

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	10162 9390
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	750 789
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	55772 45917
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	178.014 137.469
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1961.932 2083.862
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.169 12.352
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	109.29 139.477
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	787.025 762.142
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13569 13383
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3359
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13569 13383
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3716
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3359
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	4663 4757

Compare specifications (specs)