[SOLVED] RX580 or GTX 1650 Super

[Jhonan]

In my region (Mexico), the RX580 cost 243$USD while the newer GTX 1650S cost 173$

GTX 1650S: https://www.amazon.com/-/es/GeForce...gráfica-TUF-GTX1650S-O4G-GAMING/dp/B081KY5L57 (ships to Mexico)

RX580: https://www.amazon.com.mx/Sapphire-11265-05-20G-Tarjeta-Gr%C3%A1fica-Express/dp/B06ZZ6FMF8/

I've seen both of them perform mostly the same at 1080p, and since the 1650S is cheaper and heats less I was planning on getting it.

Is there a reason to choose the 580 over the other? It's mostly the fact that the AMD one has 8gb of VRAM while the nVidia one has 4. I've heard this is more important the higher the resolution and the texture quality.

Thanks a lot, and sorry if my english is a little broken. ^^

 

[tennis2]

Nope, the 1650 Super is the better choice here.

 

[4745454b]

I've seen both of them perform mostly the same at 1080p

? Huh?

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1650-turing-gpu,6096-3.html

Here is our review of the 1650. It's slower then the 570, which is faster than the 580 you are looking at. I think the question you need to ask yourself is if the 1650 is fast enough for you at 1080. Because performance wise the 580 is the better card.

 

[Jhonan]

https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/geforce-gtx-1650-turing-gpu,6096-3.html
Here is our review of the 1650.

Thanks a lot for the help, I believe you are mistaking a bit though. The card I'm comparing the 580 to is the 1650Super

https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1650S-Super-vs-Nvidia-GTX-1650/4058vs4039

It came out about a month ago I think, and appears to be of speed comparable to the 580.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Nvidia-GTX-1650S-Super-vs-AMD-RX-580/4058vs3923 Even a bit higher in this comparison.

Sorry if I'm mistaking, I might be the one confused ^^ thanks for the help again.

 

[4745454b]

Gotcha, different card.

Ignore those "benchmark" sites whenever possible. Looking at the raw specs like that is really meaningless. You really don't care about fill rates or clock speeds. Most of those stats aren't even comparable. You care about frame rates which your first link doesn't even provide. So ignore those types of sites.

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 Super Review

Today we're bringing you a day-one review of the new GeForce GTX 1650 Super and it seems we're doing so against Nvidia's wishes. In a puzzling decision,...

www.techspot.com

Here is a review of the 1650 super and the 580. (our review didn't have the 580 but the 590 "fatboy" so I didn't link it.) Some games they tie like the first game, shadow of the tomb raider. The next game, just cause 4, gives the win to the 1650 super. Though it's not a big win. The next game has the cards flipped with the 580 beating the 1650 super. If you scroll down to the avg you see that the 580 does just barely eek out a win with a 2FPS min and 1FPS avg frame rate. Considering the extra cost and extra power draw that's not really a win.

The extra Vram and OC ability might be something to consider. The 590 is basically a 580 with higher clock speeds. The 590 does perform better still, though probably not $70 more. Look over the games in the link I gave. Unless the game you want to play performs much better on the 580, there is no reason to get it over the 1650 super.

 

[clutchc]

What are the rest of your system specs?
I'm going to be bench marking my RX 590 vs that same GTX 1650 Super tomorrow. I realize you are referring to the RX 580, but it could give you an idea of the difference between the two. If you game at 1080p, chances are, you'll never use more than 4GB VRAM unless you like to use highest settings and lots of textures.

On the other-hand if the best eye candy you can get is your threshold, then the RX 580 would be better even at a cost premium... Even though most "vs" videos online seem to give the GTX 1650 Super the edge over the RX 580 in F.P.S.

 

[Jhonan]

What are the rest of your system specs?

I'm still buying the parts, but its going to be:

Gigabyte B450 I Aorus Pro Wifi R5 2600X 16 gb 2666MHZ Crucial Ballistix 240GB Kingston A200 Corsair CX450M 80 Plus

....If you game at 1080p, chances are, you'll never use more than 4GB VRAM unless you like to use highest settings and lots of textures.

I think I might get a 2K monitor after the PC is done. For what I've seen neither of the cards perform that well beyond 1080p (with graphics in High). So I think the 1650 Super makes more sence, given its way cheaper . Though, I might keep the other in the radar.

 

[Jhonan]

...If you scroll down to the avg you see that the 580 does just barely eek out a win with a 2FPS min and 1FPS avg frame rate. Considering the extra cost and extra power draw that's not really a win.

The extra Vram and OC ability might be something to consider. .... Unless the game you want to play performs much better on the 580, there is no reason to get it over the 1650 super.

Thanks a lot! Seeing them compared like that helps a lot ^^ I think I'll be going with the 1650 Super, I think it fits more my small build and it good to know is performs that good even being cheaper than my other option.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

1650 super is the better card. VRAM is the only real benefit of the RX580, assuming its an 8gb model.

Simmilar performance, depending on title.

Lower power draw, lower cost, and newer with probably longer driver support.

 

[tennis2]

RX580 = 1650 Super = RX5500XT for all practical purposes.

 

[NightHawkRMX]

Performance wise, yes. Really all 3 trade blows depending on title.

Efficiency, vram, cost, very

 

[clutchc]

I'll have to agree with Tennis2. My quick and dirty benchmark comparison (at 1080p) showed the RX 590 and GTX 1650 Super trade blows. At least in the few game benchmarks I tried. Although the RX 580 is slightly slower than the RX 590. So, I guess that gives the GTX 1650S the edge.
My results

 

[4745454b]

You tested 3 games. With one huge odd result.

Synthetic benchmarks are nice. But you don't play them. Over the years I've seen synthetic benchies burn people over and over. Pay attention to the game results. Which show them to be basically tied. And at the prices the OP listed the 1650 Super is the way to go.

 

[clutchc]

You tested 3 games. With one huge odd result.

Synthetic benchmarks are nice. But you don't play them. Over the years I've seen synthetic benchies burn people over and over. Pay attention to the game results. Which show them to be basically tied. And at the prices the OP listed the 1650 Super is the way to go.

Then we're not in disagreement 😉

 

[tennis2]

Man...if only someone out there on the internet had benchmarked the 1650 Super in a bunch of games....and the RX580 the same....this isn't a mystery people. The RX590 is ~10-12% faster than the RX580. It's not hard to extrapolate.

 

[clutchc]

Man...if only someone out there on the internet had benchmarked the 1650 Super in a bunch of games....and the RX580 the same....this isn't a mystery people. The RX590 is ~10-12% faster than the RX580. It's not hard to extrapolate.

According to this 11 game average, the 1650 Super and the RX 590 run neck and neck (at 1080p/medium). But I suspect the 4GB VRAM will hurt it overall as you can see when the games are set to ultra.
Still, a heck of a card for 100W (thanks to GDDR6) It needs 6GB, but I suppose Nvidia didn't want to encroach on their 1660 sales.