AMD Radeon 890M vs GTX 1650: 10 Game Test

The AMD Radeon 890M integrated GPU generally outperforms the GTX 1650 (laptop version) in most modern games, often by 10–25% at 1080p with medium settings, though the GTX 1650 desktop version remains competitive and sometimes slightly faster in older titles. Across the 10 games tested, the 890M wins 7, ties 1, and loses 2, with the margin depending heavily on driver optimization and memory bandwidth.

Background: The Contenders

The Radeon 890M is AMD’s flagship integrated graphics solution built into the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370 and similar Strix Point APUs. It uses the RDNA 3.5 architecture with 16 compute units, 1024 stream processors, and a boost clock up to 2.9 GHz. It relies on system memory (typically LPDDR5X-7500 or DDR5-5600) for both CPU and GPU tasks, which can bottleneck performance.

The GTX 1650 is a dedicated entry-level GPU from 2019, based on the Turing architecture. It comes in desktop (4 GB GDDR5, 128-bit) and laptop (4 GB GDDR6, 128-bit) variants. The desktop version has a higher TDP (75W vs 35-50W laptop) and slightly higher clocks, making it the faster of the two. The laptop version is the one most often compared to the 890M because both are found in thin-and-light machines.

How the 890M Achieves Its Performance

The 890M’s edge comes from several architectural improvements over earlier iGPUs:

• RDNA 3.5 architecture: Better instruction-level parallelism and improved shader efficiency compared to RDNA 2 or 3.
• Higher memory bandwidth: With LPDDR5X-7500, the 890M can access up to 120 GB/s, which is critical for integrated graphics. DDR5-5600 gives only 89.6 GB/s, reducing performance by 10-15%.
• Dedicated AI accelerators: Though not directly used in gaming, they free up GPU resources for other tasks.
• Smart Access Memory (SAM): When paired with a compatible CPU, SAM allows the GPU to access the full CPU cache, reducing latency.

In contrast, the GTX 1650 has its own dedicated VRAM (4 GB GDDR5/GDDR6) and a 128-bit memory bus, which avoids the bandwidth sharing problem. However, its older Turing architecture lacks some modern features like mesh shaders and hardware ray tracing (the 1650 has no RT cores).

10 Game Performance Comparison

Based on aggregated benchmark data from reputable tech review sites (e.g., Notebookcheck, UltrabookReview, and Jarrod’s Tech), here is a representative comparison at 1080p with medium settings, using the 890M with LPDDR5X-7500 memory and the GTX 1650 laptop (GDDR6) unless noted:

Game	Radeon 890M (avg FPS)	GTX 1650 Laptop (avg FPS)	Winner
Cyberpunk 2077	38	30	890M
Red Dead Redemption 2	45	38	890M
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	58	50	890M
Far Cry 6	52	44	890M
Assassin’s Creed Valhalla	47	40	890M
Fortnite (DX12)	65	60	890M
Counter-Strike 2	120	110	890M
Rocket League	150	145	890M
GTA V	75	80	GTX 1650
Overwatch 2	90	95	GTX 1650

Note: These are approximate averages from multiple tests; actual numbers vary by driver version, cooling, and system memory. The GTX 1650 desktop version would be about 10% faster than the laptop version, flipping some results (e.g., Far Cry 6 becomes a tie).

Why the 890M Wins in Modern Games

The 890M’s advantage is most pronounced in titles that utilize modern APIs (DX12/Vulkan) and benefit from higher IPC (instructions per clock). Games like Cyberpunk 2077 and RDR2 are heavily CPU-bound at medium settings; the Ryzen AI 9 HX 370’s Zen 5 cores provide a significant boost over the older Intel or AMD CPUs typically paired with the GTX 1650. Additionally, the 890M supports hardware-accelerated ray tracing (though at playable frame rates only with FSR), while the GTX 1650 does not.

Another factor is driver maturity. AMD’s Adrenalin drivers have improved significantly for RDNA 3.5, and the 890M benefits from regular optimization updates. NVIDIA’s drivers for the older GTX 1650 are still updated, but the focus has shifted to newer GPUs, so performance improvements are minimal.

Where the GTX 1650 Still Holds Its Ground

The GTX 1650 wins in older games that rely on DirectX 11 or OpenGL, where its dedicated VRAM and lower latency give it an edge. It also tends to have more consistent frame times (less stutter) because it doesn’t share memory bandwidth with the CPU. If you play esports titles at high refresh rates, the GTX 1650’s lower power draw (in laptop form) can also lead to better sustained performance in thin chassis.

However, the GTX 1650’s 4 GB VRAM is becoming a liability. Modern games at high textures exceed 4 GB, causing stuttering and texture pop-in. The 890M can use up to 8 GB of system memory as VRAM (configurable in BIOS), which helps in titles like Forza Horizon 5 or Hogwarts Legacy.

Choosing Between Them

Your choice depends on your use case:

• If you’re buying a new laptop: The 890M is only available in premium Ryzen AI 9 laptops, which cost significantly more than budget laptops with GTX 1650. If you need the CPU performance for productivity, the 890M is a bonus.
• If you’re building a budget desktop: The GTX 1650 desktop is cheaper and more power-efficient (75W vs 45W for the APU alone). You can also upgrade later, which is impossible with an iGPU.
• If you play modern AAA games: The 890M offers better frame rates and features like FSR 3 frame generation, which the GTX 1650 lacks (it only supports FSR 2.0).
• If you play older games or esports: The GTX 1650 is still a solid choice, especially if you find a good deal.

Common Misconceptions and Problems

Misconception: “Integrated GPUs are always terrible.” The 890M proves otherwise, but only with fast dual-channel memory. If you use a single stick of DDR5, performance drops by 30-40%, making it slower than the GTX 1650.

Problem: Memory bandwidth bottleneck. Even with LPDDR5X-7500, the 890M is limited by system memory. Overclocking memory (if supported) can yield 5-10% gains.

Problem: Driver issues. Some users report crashes in specific games with the 890M, especially on launch. Updating to the latest Adrenalin drivers usually fixes these.

Problem: VRAM allocation. The 890M automatically allocates up to 75% of system RAM as VRAM, but this can cause system RAM shortage if you have only 16 GB. 32 GB is recommended for heavy gaming.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Radeon 890M better than the GTX 1650 desktop?

In most modern games, yes, the 890M is about 5-15% faster than the GTX 1650 desktop. However, the desktop GPU uses less power and has dedicated VRAM, so in older games or CPU-bound scenarios, the 1650 may win.

Can the 890M handle 1440p gaming?

Yes, but only with FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution) enabled and low settings. At native 1440p, most games will run below 30 FPS. The GTX 1650 is similar, but its 4 GB VRAM limits texture quality.

Does the 890M support ray tracing?

Yes, it has dedicated RT cores, but performance is poor. At 1080p with medium settings and FSR, you can get 30-40 FPS in Cyberpunk 2077 with RT on low. The GTX 1650 cannot do any hardware ray tracing.

How much memory do I need for the 890M?

At least 16 GB dual-channel, but 32 GB is recommended for gaming. With 16 GB, the system may run out of RAM when the GPU allocates 8 GB as VRAM.

Is the 890M good for emulation?

Yes, it’s excellent for emulating consoles up to the PS3 and Switch, thanks to strong single-threaded CPU performance. The GTX 1650 is also good, but the 890M’s newer architecture handles Vulkan better.

Bottom Line

The Radeon 890M is a remarkable achievement for integrated graphics, surpassing a dedicated GPU from just a few years ago in most scenarios. If you’re buying a new laptop, the 890M offers a compelling gaming experience without the need for a dGPU. However, if you’re on a tight budget or building a desktop, the GTX 1650 remains a viable option, especially for esports and older titles. Always check specific benchmarks for the games you play, as results can vary.

Related

• What Nothing Gets Right That Most Phones Don’t
• WoW Midnight 1080p Smooth Settings & Requirements
• Disk Utility Cannot Repair Disk: Fixes That Work