Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q Radeon R9 M365X 4GB
Hitman 3 70% 600%
Cyberpunk 2077 31% 438%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 19% 392%
Resident Evil 8 31% 438%
FIFA 21 34% 171%
Grand Theft Auto VI 84% 657%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 16% 376%
Genshin Impact 31% 438%
Far Cry 6 89% 679%
The Medium 63% 571%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q are massively better than the AMD Radeon R9 M365X 4GB.

The GTX 1650 Ti has a 860 MHz higher core clock speed and 16 more Texture Mapping Units than the R9 M365X. This results in the GTX 1650 Ti providing 58.2 GTexel/s better texturing performance. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The GTX 1650 Ti has a 860 MHz higher core clock speed and 16 more Render Output Units than the R9 M365X. This results in the GTX 1650 Ti providing 37.5 GPixel/s better pixeling performance. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The GTX 1650 Ti was released over three years more recently than the R9 M365X, and so the GTX 1650 Ti is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the R9 M365X when running the latest games.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and the Radeon R9 M365X 4GB have the same amount of video memory, but are likely to provide slightly different experiences when displaying game textures at high resolutions.

The GTX 1650 Ti has 192 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R9 M365X, which means that the memory performance of the GTX 1650 Ti is massively better than the R9 M365X.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q has 1024 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon R9 M365X 4GB has 640. However, the actual shader performance of the GTX 1650 Ti is 1705 and the actual shader performance of the R9 M365X is 340. The GTX 1650 Ti having 1365 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the GTX 1650 Ti delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R9 M365X.

The GTX 1650 Ti transistor size technology is 16 nm (nanometers) smaller than the R9 M365X. This means that the GTX 1650 Ti is expected to run slightly cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the R9 M365X.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q requires 75 Watts to run and the Radeon R9 M365X 4GB requires 50 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 400 Watts for the GTX 1650 Ti. The GTX 1650 Ti requires 25 Watts more than the R9 M365X to run. The difference is not significant enough for the GTX 1650 Ti to have a noticeably larger impact on your yearly electricity bills than the R9 M365X.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 26 FPS on Metro: Exodus

Metro: Exodus

26 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 30.3 FPS on Assassins Creed: Odyssey

Assassins Creed: Odyssey

30.3 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 32.2 FPS on Borderlands 3

Borderlands 3

32.2 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 32.5 FPS on Control

Control

32.5 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 34.6 FPS on Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands

Tom Clancys Ghost Recon Wildlands

34.6 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 39.5 FPS on Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

39.5 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 41.2 FPS on Middle-earth: Shadow of War

Middle-earth: Shadow of War

41.2 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 41.8 FPS on The Division 2

The Division 2

41.8 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 42 FPS on Total War: Warhammer 2

Total War: Warhammer 2

42 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 42 FPS on Assassins Creed: Origins

Assassins Creed: Origins

42 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 43.6 FPS on The Witcher III

The Witcher III

43.6 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 46.8 FPS on Shadow of the Tomb Raider

Shadow of the Tomb Raider

46.8 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 47.6 FPS on Hitman 2 (2018)

Hitman 2 (2018)

47.6 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 52.6 FPS on Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5

52.6 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 53.9 FPS on Far Cry: New Dawn

Far Cry: New Dawn

53.9 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 54.1 FPS on Grand Theft Auto V

Grand Theft Auto V

54.1 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 58.5 FPS on Wolfenstein: Youngblood

Wolfenstein: Youngblood

58.5 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 60.1 FPS on Battlefield V

Battlefield V

60.1 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 63.5 FPS on Forza Horizon 4

Forza Horizon 4

63.5 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 86.9 FPS on Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus

Wolfenstein II: The New Colossus

86.9 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 9.4 FPS on Battlefield V

Battlefield V

9.4 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 17.6 FPS on Far Cry: New Dawn

Far Cry: New Dawn

17.6 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 33.9 FPS on Wolfenstein: Youngblood

Wolfenstein: Youngblood

33.9 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 18.5 FPS on Control

Control

18.5 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 20.7 FPS on Borderlands 3

Borderlands 3

20.7 FPS

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q gets 26.7 FPS on Wolfenstein: Youngblood

Wolfenstein: Youngblood

26.7 FPS

GPU Architecture

Core Speed1485 MHzvs625 MHz
Boost Clock1665 MHzvs-
ArchitectureTuringGCN 1.0 Venus PRO
OC Potential - vs Good
Driver Support Great vs Great
Release Date31 Mar 2020vs09 Jun 2015
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768
10
green tick vs
7.7
1600x900
10
green tick vs
5.9
1920x1080
9.2
green tick vs
4.5
2560x1440
6.9
green tick vs
3
3840x2160
5.3
green tick vs
2

GPU Memory

Memory4096 MBvs4096 MB
Memory Speed2000 MHzvs1000 MHz
Memory Bus128 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR6vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth256GB/secvs64GB/sec
L2 Cache 0 KB vs green tick 256 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units1024vs640
Actual Shader Performance82%vs16%
Technology12nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units56vs40
Texture Rate83.2 GTexel/svs25 GTexel/s
Render Output Units32vs16
Pixel Rate47.5 GPixel/svs10 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)7680x4320vs4096x2160
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections0vs0
HDMI Connections0vs0
DisplayPort Connections0vs0
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power75 Wattsvs50 Watts
Recommended PSU400 Watts-

GPU Features

DirectX12.0vs12.0
Shader Model6.4vs5.0
Open GL4.6vs4.4
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes
SLI/Crossfirenovsyes
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i5-9300H 4-Core 2.4GHzvsIntel Core i5-4340M 2.9GHz
Recommended RAM16 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1920x1080vs1600x900

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewOverview
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a mid-range GeForce 16 Series graphics card for laptops based on the Turing GPU architecture. It is smaller and doesn't drain the battery as fast compared to the mobile version, but it is weaker in performance.
Architecture
The Turing architecture represents a process shrink down to 12nm compared to 14nm Pascal. Unlike the RTX series, the GTX series does not support real-time ray-tracing.

GPU
It equips a Turing GPU codenamed N18P-G62, which has 1024 Shader Processing Units, 56 TMUs, 32 ROPs and 16 SMs. The central unit runs at 1485 MHz and goes up to 1665 MHz in Boost mode.

Memory
The GPU accesses a 4GB frame buffer of GDDR6 through a 128-bit memory interface, while the memory clock Operates at 2000MHz, or 8GHz effective.

Power Consumption
With a rated board TDP of 75W, this graphics card does not require a dedicated power connector.

Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q will offer a performance around 10% slower than the desktop GTX 1650 Ti. This will enable medium to high graphics performance on modern AAA 2020 released games. Although there will be variations on this frame rate we expect this card to deliver around 50+ FPS on High graphics settings at 1080p screen resolution.
Comparatively, this card will have slightly faster performance than the GTX 1060 Mobile.

System Suggestions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is best suited for resolutions up to and including 2560x1440, so our recommendation would be to use 1920x1080 in order to get the most out of your settings. We recommend a modern low-end processor such as the i5-8300 and 16GB of RAM for optimal performance.
Overview
Radeon R9 M365X 4GB is a Fast-Middle-Class Mobile Graphics Card based on the First Generation of the Graphics Core Next Architecture (GCN).



Architecture
Radeon R9 M365X 4GB Features a GPU Codenamed Venus PRO which is a First Gen GCN GPU and is identical to the Cape GPU used on the Desktop Radeon R7 250X.
Venus PRO has 10 Compute Units Unlocked and thus offers 640 Shader Processing Units, 40 TMUs and 16 ROPs.

GPU
The Central Unit is Clocked at 625MHz.

Memory: Speed
The GPU is equipped with fast GDDR5 and Accesses the Frame Buffer through a 128-bit Memory Interface. The Memory Clock Operates at 1000MHz.

Memory: Frame Buffer
The GPU can fill up a Memory Pool of up to 4GB. Under most circumstances, this only proves useful in certain 3D Games whose Settings Require Large Amounts of Memory.
However, because the GPU itself is too weak to work under other circumstances in which 4GB of Memory are needed - such as 4K Gaming, a Large Frame Buffer is mostly a Gimmick.

Power Consumption
With a rated board TDP of 50W, it is suited for large laptops.

Performance
Radeon R9 M365X 4GB is a Direct Rebrand of Radeon R9 M265X.
Performance is Comparable to the Desktop Radeon R7 250.

System Suggestions
Radeon R9 M365X 4GB is best suited for resolutions up to and including 1600x900. We recommend a Strong Processor and 8GB of RAM for Optimal Performance.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
N/A
N/A
GPU Variants
-
-