The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is at least 2x faster gaming GPU than the Radeon Pro WX 3200. We cannot compare value as at least one GPU is out of stock.
Advantages of the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
- At least 2x faster GPU for gaming
- Consumes up to 23% less energy – 50 vs 65 Watts
Advantages of the Radeon Pro WX 3200
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is better in every way
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 for Gaming
The GPU's performance in selected game and settings
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
Apr 2nd, 2020
Average FPS
61
100%
Min 1% FPS
29
100%
Price, $
Out of Stock
Value, $/FPS
Not Available
All items are out of stock.
Radeon Pro WX 3200
Jul 2nd, 2019
Average FPS
49
80%
Min 1% FPS
21
72%
Price, $
$133.29
100%
Value, $/FPS
$2.72/FPS
100%
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 in My Games
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
The FPS you'll get in saved games, click on a game to change it
Add a Game
Select Settings
Synthetic Benchmarks
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 in synthetic GPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Radeon Pro WX 3200 in core GPU performance specifications
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
Apr 2nd, 2020
Memory
4 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
160 GB/s
100%
Pixel Fillrate
38.4 GPixel/s
100%
Texture Fillrate
76.8 GTexel/s
100%
FP32
2.458 TFLOPS
100%
Radeon Pro WX 3200
Jul 2nd, 2019
Memory
4 GB
100%
Memory Bandwidth
96 GB/s
60%
Pixel Fillrate
20.72 GPixel/s
54%
Texture Fillrate
41.44 GTexel/s
54%
FP32
1.658 TFLOPS
67%
Specifications
Comparison of all specifications
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | SpecificationsComparison of all specifications | Radeon Pro WX 3200 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
Apr 2nd, 2020 | Release Date | Jul 2nd, 2019 |
| Not Available | MSRP | $199.00 |
| GeForce 16 Mobile | Generation | Radeon Pro Polaris |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
50 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Memory | ||
| 4 GB | Memory Size | 4 GB |
| GDDR6 | Memory Type | GDDR5 |
| 128-bit | Memory Bus | 128-bit |
160 GB/s | Bandwidth | 96 GB/s |
| Theoretical Performance | ||
38.4 GPixel/s | Pixel Fillrate | 20.72 GPixel/s |
76.8 GTexel/s | Texture Fillrate | 41.44 GTexel/s |
2.458 TFLOPS | FP32 | 1.658 TFLOPS |
