Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon R9 290X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Radeon R9 290X outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Summary
We compared two graphics cards: the GeForce GTX 1650 with 4GB VRAM (Turing architecture), against the Radeon R9 290X with 4GB VRAM. Both graphics cards offer competitive value for their respective price points. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient, consuming 75W compared to 290W. On this page, you will find detailed benchmark comparisons, technical specifications, value score analysis, and key differences to help you choose the right graphics card for your needs and budget.
Key Differences
An overview of the main advantages of each graphics card
Reasons to consider the GeForce GTX 1650
Reasons to consider the Radeon R9 290X
Value Score Comparison
Price-to-performance value analysis
Benchmarks
Performance comparison across 1 common benchmarks
3DMark synthetic
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side hardware comparison
| Specification | GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon R9 290X |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | Turing | N/A |
| VRAM Size | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| TDP | 75W | 290W |
| Current Price | $249 New • Amazon | $210 New • Amazon |
Conclusion
But if raw gaming performance and future-proofing are more important – go for the Radeon R9 290X. For energy efficiency and lower power consumption, the GeForce GTX 1650 is the better choice. Both graphics cards have their strengths, so choose based on your specific gaming needs, budget constraints, and performance requirements.