AMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Our index puts the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER roughly 34% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 280X. This is an estimate for ranking, not a measured benchmark, and the gap varies considerably by title and by resolution.
| Specification | AMD Radeon R9 280X | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | AMD | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | GCN 1 | Turing |
| Relative performance index | 47 | 63 (better) |
| Video memory | 3 GB | 4 GB (better) |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory bus | 384-bit (better) | 128-bit |
| Release year | 2013 | 2019 (better) |
| Board power | 250 W | 100 W (better) |
| Suggested PSU | 600 W | 350 W (better) |
| Hardware ray tracing | No | No |
| Upscaling support | Not recorded | FSR 3, XeSS |
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
Green marks the stronger figure for that row only — for power draw and PSU requirement, lower is treated as better. Performance indexes are CanMyPcPlay estimates; read how they are derived.
Which should you pick?
- Check video memory, not just speed. A faster card with less VRAM can perform worse in recent titles at high texture settings.
- Check power and clearance. Confirm your PSU and case can take the card — the build checker does this.
- Upscaling support differs. DLSS is NVIDIA-only; FSR and XeSS run more broadly.
Other comparisons
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs AMD Radeon 780M (integrated)
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs AMD Radeon RX 570
- AMD Radeon R9 280X vs Intel Arc Graphics (integrated, Meteor Lake)