3DMark Graph

In 3DMark the ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1650 SUPER is 30% faster than the ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1650.  The SAPPHIRE PULSE Radeon RX 5500 XT 4G OC is very close to the ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1650 SUPER O4G GAMING, only 0.3% difference.  Overclocking the ASUS ROG STRIX GTX 1650 SUPER improved performance by 13%.

Join the Conversation


  1. Nice to see both companies are competitive with price and performance. Still I think < $200 GPU’s are priced too high. The 8gb 5500XT should be $169 for example.

    AMD pricing it the same as Nvidia, as a side thought, gives the feel for equivalence to Nvidia vs AMD being #2. I like the AMD driver UI significantly better than Nvidia with the features and layout but like how Nvidia drivers are more consistent, less bugs and they work for the most part. What a toss up, in this case I think I would go with the 1650 Super unless 5500XT had a Game Bundle or better one. If the 5500XT 8gb was $169 then the choice would be very easy.

    How if people in general had a 50/50 buying result between AMD/Nvidia GPU cards, AMD would be winning here big time. AMD I think is finally becoming smart in how they price their card in relation to Nvidia.

  2. "With performance between the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and Radeon RX 5500 XT 4GB models being so close and evenly matched it is all going to come down to price and clock speeds. "

    Hardware wise sure. But the other difference is the drivers. And that is all I’m going to say.

    It is nice to see some very solid 1080p performance out of both camps at under $200. Not that many years ago (ok it is a lot of years) $200 to me was the absolute maximum I would EVER even consider spending on a GPU. And that needed to last for years.

    Now they just need to make LP versions of these cards, and make them run on PCIE bus power alone (75w?) would be great for ITX living room PCs.

Leave a comment