NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs AMD Radeon R9 M275

VS
Performance
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q254% better
11,53811% of 104,598
Radeon R9 M275
3,2613% of 104,598

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has 254% better performance than the Radeon R9 M275 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

Performance per dollar
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
No data available
Radeon R9 M275
No data available

We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and the Radeon R9 M275 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

Shop GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
Shop Radeon R9 M275
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Summary

#

About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q GPU

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a mobile graphics card that launched in Q2 2020. It is built on the Turing GPU microarchitecture (codename TU117) and is manufactured on a 12 nm process.

Memory

The GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, with a 1,250 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 160 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q includes 1,024 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,035 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,200 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 64 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 32 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.

Compatibility & Power Consumption

The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 50 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.

Benchmark Performance

The GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has the 165th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 11.03% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

About the AMD Radeon R9 M275 GPU

The AMD Radeon R9 M275 is an end-of-life mobile graphics card that released in Q1 2014. It is built on the GCN 1.0 GPU microarchitecture (codename Venus) and is manufactured on a 28 nm process.

Memory

The R9 M275 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,000 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 64 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The R9 M275 includes 640 stream processors (SPs), the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 900 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 925 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 40 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 16 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.

Benchmark Performance

The R9 M275 has the 290th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 3.12% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.

General Info

General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.

InfoGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
ManufacturerNVIDIAAMD
ArchitectureTuringGCN 1.0
Market SegmentMobileMobile
Release DateQ2 2020Q1 2014
Production StatusActiveEnd-of-life
ShopCheck PriceCheck Price

Gaming Performance

#

Select a game to compare FPS metrics

Display FPS for Crysis Remastered
Crysis Remastered
Display FPS for Cyberpunk 2077 (1.0)
Cyberpunk 2077 (1.0)
Display FPS for Immortals Fenyx Rising
Immortals Fenyx Rising
Display FPS for Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War
Display FPS for Yakuza: Like a Dragon
Yakuza: Like a Dragon
Display FPS for Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Assassin's Creed Valhalla
Display FPS for Watch Dogs: Legion
Watch Dogs: Legion

FPS Benchmarks

This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.

  • Frames Per Second
FPS data for Crysis Remastered
Crysis Remastered
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
Low - 720p
154 FPS
--
Medium - 1080p
60 FPS
--
High - 1080p
32 FPS
--
Ultra - 1080p
24 FPS
--
QHD - 1440p
--
--
4K UHD - 2160p
--
--
FPS Source: Notebookcheck

Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)

The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.

Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q orRadeon R9 M275

Compare Cost Per Frame

The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.

Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q orRadeon R9 M275
GPUCost Per Frame
Our database does not have enough data to compare the FPS per dollar with other GPUs.

Benchmark Performance

#
Performance
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q254% better
11,53811% of 104,598
Radeon R9 M275
3,2613% of 104,598

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has 254% better performance than the Radeon R9 M275 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is ranked 165th with a score of 11,538, and the Radeon R9 M275 is ranked 290th with a score of 3,261.

Performance per dollar
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
No data available
Radeon R9 M275
No data available

We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and the Radeon R9 M275 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.

Relative Performance

The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.

Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q or
GPUBenchmark Performance
Arc A370M12,089.5+5%
Quadro M5000M11,845+3%
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q11,538
Quadro T2000 Max-Q11,461-1%
Quadro T1000 Mobile11,377-1%
Radeon R9 M3753,314-71%
GeForce 945M3,309.5-71%
Radeon R9 M2753,261-72%
Radeon HD 6990M3,227-72%
GeForce GTX 675M3,218-72%

Relative Value For Money

The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.

Choose Baseline GPU:GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q orRadeon R9 M275
GPUPerformance Per Dollar
Our database does not have enough data to compare the benchmark performance per dollar with other GPUs.

Benchmark Scores

This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.

  • Popular
BenchmarkGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
3DMark Time Spy Graphics
3,098
--
3DMark Time Spy Score
3,235.5
--
3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
47,657
(+315.89%)
11,459
3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
8,564
(+354.32%)
1,885
3DMark 11 Performance Score
11,398
(+258.2%)
3,182
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
140
(+177.23%)
50.5
PassMark G3D Mark
6,410
(+474.89%)
1,115
PassMark G2D Mark
335
561
(+67.46%)
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck

Technical Specs

#

Graphics Processor

General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
CodenameTU117Venus
ArchitectureTuringGCN 1.0
Process Size12 nm28 nm
Transistors4,700 million1,500 million

Memory Details

Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
Memory Size4 GB2 GB
Memory TypeGDDR6GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth160 Gb/s64 Gb/s
Memory Clock1,250 MHz1,000 MHz
Memory Interface128 bit128 bit
L1 Cache64 KB16 KB
L2 Cache1,024 KB256 KB

Board Compatibility

Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Thermal Design Power (TDP)50 W--
OutputsDevice DependentDevice Dependent

Cores & Clock Speeds

Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
Stream Processors (SP)--640
CUDA Cores1,024--
Compute Units (CU)--10
Stream Multiprocessors (SM)16--
Texture Mapping Units (TMU)6440
Render Output Units (ROP)3216
Core Clock Speed1,035 MHz900 MHz
Core Clock Speed (Boost)1,200 MHz925 MHz

Theoretical Performance

Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
Pixel Fill Rate38.4 GPixel/s14.8 GPixel/s
Texture Fill Rate76.8 GTexel/s37 GTexel/s
FP32 Performance2.46 TFLOPS1,184 GFLOPS
FP64 Performance76.8 GFLOPS74 GFLOPS

API Support

Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.

SpecGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-QRadeon R9 M275
DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_1)
OpenCL3.02.1 (1.2)
OpenGL4.64.6
Shader Model6.86.5 (5.1)

Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:

Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:

* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.