AMD Radeon 740M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER Comparison

The AMD Radeon 740M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER occupy very different corners of the graphics landscape. The data shows a decisive performance advantage for the NVIDIA card in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, while the AMD part is a modern integrated processor aimed at efficiency. The GTX 1650 SUPER wins 2 out of 2 shared tests, with the Radeon 740M trailing by 76.8% in OpenCL and 69.2% in Vulkan. However, the Radeon 740M is not without its own distinct identity: it is built on a current-generation 4 nm process, supports DirectX 12 Ultimate, and draws a fraction of the power. The choice here is not about which is faster, but which is the right fit for the intended system and workload.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the clear winner for raw compute and graphics throughput. In the recorded data, it dominates the AMD Radeon 740M in both available benchmarks. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 43,875 versus 10,172 represents a massive gap, and the Vulkan score of 50,519 versus 15,568 confirms that this is not a single-test anomaly. The GTX 1650 SUPER also benefits from dedicated GDDR6 memory with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth, which is critical for texture-heavy gaming and high-resolution workloads. Its 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs provide the hardware resources needed for sustained rendering tasks.

The AMD Radeon 740M wins in the efficiency and integration category. It is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) with a 45 W TDP, compared to the GTX 1650 SUPER's 100 W TDP. The Radeon 740M requires no power connectors and is a single-slot IGP, meaning it can be embedded in a motherboard without additional cooling or power delivery. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), which is a newer API feature level than the GTX 1650 SUPER's DirectX 12 (12_1). For systems where space, power, and motherboard simplicity are priorities, the Radeon 740M has a clear advantage. The data shows no scenario where the Radeon 740M wins on raw performance, but its architectural position is unique.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on fundamentally different architectures and processes. The AMD Radeon 740M uses RDNA 3.0 architecture on a 4 nm TSMC process, with the chip name Phoenix2. It contains 20,900 million transistors on a 137 mm² die, resulting in a transistor density of 152.6M per mm². This is a high-density, modern design intended for low-power integration. The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and 4 ray tracing cores. Its base clock is 800 MHz with a boost clock of 2800 MHz. Memory is system shared, meaning it uses the host system's RAM, and bandwidth is listed as system dependent.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER uses the Turing architecture on a 12 nm TSMC process, with the chip name TU116. It contains 6,600 million transistors on a 284 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 23.2M per mm². This is a larger, older process node, but the GPU compensates with a higher transistor budget per functional unit. The GTX 1650 SUPER has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Its base clock is 1530 MHz with a boost clock of 1725 MHz. Memory is 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth.

The difference in transistor density is stark: the Radeon 740M packs over 6.5 times more transistors per mm² than the GTX 1650 SUPER. However, the NVIDIA card uses those transistors on a larger die to deliver far more shading units and memory bandwidth. The Radeon 740M is a compact, power-sipping design, while the GTX 1650 SUPER is a dedicated expansion card that prioritizes throughput. The Radeon 740M also has a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, whereas the GTX 1650 SUPER uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The AMD part's API support is more modern, including DirectX 12 Ultimate, but the NVIDIA part supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6 as well.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data includes two direct comparisons, and in both, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER wins by a wide margin. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43,875 compared to the Radeon 740M's 10,172. This is a delta of -76.8% for the AMD part, meaning the NVIDIA card is over four times faster in this compute test. The OpenCL benchmark is heavily dependent on raw throughput, and the GTX 1650 SUPER's 1,280 shading units and 4.416 TFLOPS of FP32 performance are far beyond the Radeon 740M's 256 units and 2.867 TFLOPS.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the result is similar but slightly less extreme. The GTX 1650 SUPER scores 50,519, while the Radeon 740M scores 15,568, a delta of -69.2%. Vulkan is a lower-level API that can sometimes favor newer architectures, but the sheer hardware difference overwhelms any architectural advantage. The GTX 1650 SUPER's texture rate of 138.0 GTexel/s and pixel rate of 55.20 GPixel/s are roughly 3 times and 2.5 times higher than the Radeon 740M's 44.80 GTexel/s and 22.40 GPixel/s, respectively. These rates directly translate to rendering speed in both synthetic and real-world workloads.

The average benchmark score in the database tells a broader story. The Radeon 740M has an average score of 12,870, which places it at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 1650 SUPER has an average score of 11,047, placing it at the 50th percentile. This is a curious data point: the Radeon 740M has a higher average score across all tests in the database, even though it loses both head-to-head tests. This is because the database includes additional benchmarks for the GTX 1650 SUPER that are not shared with the Radeon 740M, such as Passmark tests and 3DMark Steel Nomad, which pull its average down. The head-to-head data is the only apples-to-apples comparison, and it clearly favors NVIDIA.

FAQ

Q: Is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER always faster than the AMD Radeon 740M?

A: In the shared head-to-head benchmarks, yes. The GTX 1650 SUPER wins Geekbench OpenCL by 76.8% and Geekbench Vulkan by 69.2%. No benchmark in the recorded data shows the Radeon 740M ahead.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon 740M support newer graphics features?

A: Yes. The Radeon 740M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 1650 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1). The AMD part also has 4 ray tracing cores, which the NVIDIA card lacks entirely.

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The Radeon 740M has a TDP of 45 W and requires no power connectors. The GTX 1650 SUPER has a TDP of 100 W and requires a 1x 6-pin power connector, with a suggested PSU of 300 W.

Q: Which GPU has more memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER has dedicated 4 GB GDDR6 memory with a 128-bit bus and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 740M uses system shared memory, with bandwidth listed as system dependent.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in physical size?

A: No. The Radeon 740M is an IGP with no slot width and no dimensions listed. The GTX 1650 SUPER is a dual-slot card measuring 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width.

Q: What is the production status of each GPU?

A: The Radeon 740M is listed as Active, with a release date of 2024-01-30. The GTX 1650 SUPER is End-of-life, with a release date of 2019-11-21.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in nearly every measurable specification. The Radeon 740M uses a 4 nm process, while the GTX 1650 SUPER uses a 12 nm process. Transistor counts are 20,900 million versus 6,600 million, and die sizes are 137 mm² versus 284 mm². The clock speeds are also very different: the Radeon 740M has a base clock of 800 MHz and a boost of 2800 MHz, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has a base of 1530 MHz and a boost of 1725 MHz.

Memory configurations are entirely distinct. The Radeon 740M has system shared memory with no dedicated size or bus width. The GTX 1650 SUPER has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The Radeon 740M's memory clock is also system shared, whereas the GTX 1650 SUPER runs at 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective speed.

Compute resources differ significantly. The Radeon 740M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The GTX 1650 SUPER has 1,280 shading units, 80 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The Radeon 740M has 4 ray tracing cores, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has none. FP32 performance is 2.867 TFLOPS for the AMD part and 4.416 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA part. FP16 performance is 2.867 TFLOPS (1:1) for AMD and 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1) for NVIDIA.

Power and physical specs are also different: TDP is 45 W versus 100 W, slot width is IGP versus dual-slot, and power connectors are none versus 1x 6-pin. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x8 for AMD and PCIe 3.0 x16 for NVIDIA. Display outputs are motherboard dependent for the AMD part, while the NVIDIA card has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The Radeon 740M has a launch MSRP of none, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 159 USD.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for raw performance: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the superior choice for any workload where compute and rendering speed are the primary concern. Its wins in OpenCL and Vulkan are by 76.8% and 69.2%, respectively, and its dedicated memory and higher texture and pixel rates make it the better option for gaming and GPU-accelerated tasks. The GTX 1650 SUPER's 4 GB GDDR6 memory and 192.0 GB/s bandwidth provide a stable foundation that system shared memory cannot match. For users building a desktop with room for a dual-slot card and a 300 W PSU, this is the practical pick.

The AMD Radeon 740M is the right choice for a different set of priorities. As an integrated processor, it requires no add-in card, no power connectors, and only 45 W of power. Its 4 nm process and RDNA 3.0 architecture make it a modern, efficient solution for thin-and-light systems or embedded platforms. It also offers DirectX 12 Ultimate and ray tracing cores, which the GTX 1650 SUPER lacks. The database shows it at the 53rd percentile overall, slightly above the GTX 1650 SUPER's 50th percentile, due to its stronger average score across all tests. For users who need a capable GPU without dedicated hardware, the Radeon 740M is the correct selection. For users who need maximum performance, the GTX 1650 SUPER is the only choice based on the recorded benchmarks.