Key Differences
In short — Radeon R9 Nano outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value. The better performing Radeon R9 Nano is 1335 days older than GeForce GTX 1650.
Advantages of AMD Radeon R9 Nano
- Performs up to 4% better in World of Warcraft than GeForce GTX 1650 - 155 vs 149 FPS
Advantages of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
- Consumes up to 57% less energy than AMD Radeon R9 Nano - 75 vs 175 Watts
World of Warcraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
FPS
149
96%
Value, €/FPS
€0.82/FPS
100%
Price, €
€121.74
100%
Value Winner
Buy for €121.74 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 71 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Maximum
Desktop • Aug 27th, 2015
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Theoretical Performance
Desktop • Apr 23rd, 2019
Pixel Fillrate
53.28 GPixel/s
83%
Texel Fillrate
93.24 GTexel/s
36%
AMD Radeon R9 Nano | vs | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 |
---|---|---|
Aug 27th, 2015 | Release Date | Apr 23rd, 2019 |
Pirate Islands | Generation | GeForce 16 |
$649 | MSRP | $149 |
1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
1x 8-pin | Power Connectors | None |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 GB | Memory | 4 GB |
HBM | Type | GDDR5 |
4096-bit | Bus | 128-bit |
512 GB/s | Bandwidth | 128.1 GB/s |
1000 MHz | Base Clock Speed | 1485 MHz |
Not Available | Boost Clock Speed | 1665 MHz |
500 MHz | Memory Clock Speed | 2001 MHz |