GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 370
Summary
Reasons to consider GeForce GTX 1650 |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
| Higher theoretical gaming performance, based on specifications. |
| Supports PhysX |
| Supports G-Sync |
| Supports ShadowPlay (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty) |
| Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute |
| Supports DirectX Raytracing (DXR) |
| Supports Deep Learning Super-Sampling (DLSS) |
Reasons to consider Radeon R9 370 |
| Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute |
| Supports ReLive (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty) |
| Supports Mantle |
| Based on an outdated architecture (AMD GCN), there may be no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
HWBench recommends GeForce GTX 1650
Based on theoretical specifications.
Core Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | Radeon R9 370 | |
|---|
| GPU Name | TU107 () | vs | Trinidad (Trinidad PRO) |
| Fab Process | 12 nm | vs | 28 nm |
| Die Size | 0 mm² | vs | 212 mm² |
| Transistors | unknown | vs | 2,800 million |
| Shaders | 896 | vs | 1280 |
| Compute Units | 14 | vs | 24 |
| Core clock | 1485 MHz | vs | 925 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | vs | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | vs | 80 |
Memory Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | Radeon R9 370 | |
|---|
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | vs | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128 bit | vs | 256 bit |
| Memory Speed | 2000 MHz
8000 MHz effective | vs | 1400 MHz
5600 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 4096 Mb | vs | 2048 Mb |
Additional details
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | Radeon R9 370 | |
|---|
| TDP | 0 watts | vs | 110 watts |
| Release Date | 30 Apr 2019 | vs | 5 May 2015 |
GeForce GTX 1650
53.28 GP/s
Radeon R9 370
31.20 GP/s
GigaPixels - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
93.24 GT/s
Radeon R9 370
78.00 GT/s
GigaTexels - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
128.00 GB/s
Radeon R9 370
179.20 GB/s
GB/s - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
2984.00 GFLOPs
Radeon R9 370
2496.00 GFLOPs
GFLOPs - higher is better