NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs AMD Radeon R9 M390X

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and AMD Radeon R9 M390X 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 Ti

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 10 month(s) later
• Around 87% higher core clock speed: 1350 MHz vs 723 MHz
• 1027x more texture fill rate: 95.04 GTexel/s vs 92.54 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 75 Watt
• 2.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7566 vs 3597
• Around 90% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 41946 vs 22044
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 151.899 vs 64.199
• Around 44% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1844.67 vs 1284.053
• Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 10.683 vs 5.881
• Around 48% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.919 vs 78.169
• 2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.054 vs 312.822
• Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12180 vs 6508
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 vs 8593
• Around 87% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12180 vs 6508
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 vs 8593

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M390X

• 2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 1024
• Around 12% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 435 vs 389
• 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 24690 vs 8062
• 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 24690 vs 8062

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M390X

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	7566 3597
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	389 435
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	41946 22044
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	151.899 64.199
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1844.67 1284.053
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10.683 5.881
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	115.919 78.169
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	644.054 312.822
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12180 6508
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8926 8593
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8062 24690
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	12180 6508
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8926 8593
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8062 24690

Compare specifications (specs)