Based on the TU117 door, the new GeForce GTX 1650 still includes all new Turing shader innovations that enhance performance and efficiency, including support for simultaneous floating point and integer, a unified cache architecture with greater L1 cache and adaptive shading. TDP for the new GPU is only 75 watts and that means it does not need an external power connector, so it will be the fastest graphics card that does not need external PCIe power. Then it's not the GTX 1660 Ti and 1660, there won't be a Founders Edition version, but no big loss there. GTX 1650 packs 896 CUDA cores, it's 36% fewer than you get with the GTX 1660. It's the biggest downgrade we've seen in the Turing product stack yet. For the most part, we have seen cuts of about 20% when they go from 2080 to 2070, 2070 to 2060, 2060 to 1660 Ti and then only 8% from 1660 Ti to vanilla 1660. just another example of downgrading over 30% were RTX 2080 Ti to RTX 2080, here we saw a 32% reduction in core number and this led to a 25% reduction in performance at 4K. We expect to see a similar performance decrease for GTX 1650 compared to 1660, as 36% reduction in kernels is supported by a 33% reduction in memory bandwidth. In addition, while the 1660 is armed with 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, the GTX 1650 receives 4 GB with a 128-bit wide memory bus for a maximum…
Based on the TU117 door, the new GeForce GTX 1650 still includes all new Turing shader innovations that enhance performance and efficiency, including support for simultaneous floating point and integer, a unified cache architecture with greater L1 cache and adaptive shading.
TDP for the new GPU is only 75 watts and that means it does not need an external power connector, so it will be the fastest graphics card that does not need external PCIe power. Then it’s not the GTX 1660 Ti and 1660, there won’t be a Founders Edition version, but no big loss there.
GTX 1650 packs 896 CUDA cores, it’s 36% fewer than you get with the GTX 1660. It’s the biggest downgrade we’ve seen in the Turing product stack yet. For the most part, we have seen cuts of about 20% when they go from 2080 to 2070, 2070 to 2060, 2060 to 1660 Ti and then only 8% from 1660 Ti to vanilla 1660.
just another example of downgrading over 30% were RTX 2080 Ti to RTX 2080, here we saw a 32% reduction in core number and this led to a 25% reduction in performance at 4K. We expect to see a similar performance decrease for GTX 1650 compared to 1660, as 36% reduction in kernels is supported by a 33% reduction in memory bandwidth.
In addition, while the 1660 is armed with 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, the GTX 1650 receives 4 GB with a 128-bit wide memory bus for a maximum of 128 GB / s. The default clock speed has been set to a base of 1485 MHz and an increase of 1665 MHz, a 7% clock speed reduction over the GTX 1660.
Nvidia claims that the GTX 1650 is twice as fast as the GTX 950, and up to 70% faster than the GTX 1050 at 1080p, but the wording is a bit tricky here because their claim is specific to modern games with complex shaders. So games such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Wolfenstein II, for example. Therefore, the average performance increase can be lower depending on the title.
For testing, we will look carefully at 1080p performance in about ten titles. Our test system is the standard GPU bench that contains a Core i9-9900K clocked at 5 GHz with 32 GB DDR4-3200 memory …
Kickstarting benchmarks is a new title in our test package: World War Z. This games support the Vulkan API, but the performance of Nvidia GPUs is not good with the current driver, so GeForce cards have been tested with the DX11 while AMD uses the lower level Vulkan API. Still, it saw that the Radeon RX 570 smokes the new GTX 1650 with a huge 38% margin. Meanwhile, GTX 1650 was 26% slower than 1050 Ti, but also 15% slower than 1060 3GB.
Performance in the Apex Legends was very competitive between the GTX 1650 and RX 570 at least on the quiet part of the game that we are testing. Radeon GPU was faster with a narrow 4% margin and generally less than 5% we considered.
Division 2 has been a strong title for AMD and it continues with this RX 570 vs. GTX 1650 battle. Here, the Radeon GPU offers 27% more performance at 1080p making it a superior GPU.
Nvidia promised good things in new complex titles like Tomb Raider, but here we can see the GTX 1650 simply does not deliver. Performance was similar to the RX 570, but for a new GPU, similar performance is not good enough. GTX 1650 should comfortably hit 570 at this price point.
The GTX 1650 takes a serious blow in Forza Horizon 4 where it was 21% slower than the RX 570. This difference was also noticeable in the game, as the RX 570 never appeared below 60 fps, allowing for smoother gaming experience.
On average, Radeon RX 570 was 11% faster than 1650 when tested with Just Cause 4, it is usually a good title for Nvidia but even here the new budget Turing cannot get It is done.
Resident Evil 2 is another new title that works well on AMD hardware and here RX 570 was 30% faster than GTX 1650. While Radeon GPU was able to keep over 60 fps all the time, 1650 fell to 50 fps.
A game that you can always rely on to increase GeForce performance is Fortnite and here the GTX 1650 edge can out the RX 570 by a small margin. The GTX 1650 was also 26% faster than 1050 Ti.
Metro Exodus is a sponsored title from Nvidia so you expect the GTX 1650 to win here, but it doesn’t. Basically, it matched the RX 570 but it was the best thing it could do here.
Rainbow Six Siege beats us a basket ball, but considering what we have seen from Turing in this title I was ready. Here the GTX 1650 can beat the RX 570 and with convincing margin, we didn’t see any more of it.
We see similar rates in Battlefield V. RX 570 was slightly faster on average, while both gave a similar 1% low result. This meant that the GTX 1650 was 26% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti and 11% slower than the 1060 3GB.
The GTX 1650 does not impress Far Cry New Dawn, making 23% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti but 18% slower than the RX 570. In fact, 1080p using the ultra-quality preset struggled with an average of 60 fps .
Movement to power consumption, GTX 1650 is quite impressive in this regard. The Gigabyte board we tested attenuated total system consumption to 184 watts, while the MSI card beat 192 watts. This is just a 10% increase in system draw for what turned out to be over 30% performance improvement.
Compared to Radeon RX 570, total system consumption increased 55% higher. So 1650 is certainly more efficient, but we are not convinced that it is a better product overall.
With a quick look at operating temperatures and clock speeds, the MSI Gaming X occurred at 61 degrees in a 21 degree room and usually saw it at a boost frequency of 1920 MHz. Of course it was very cool and quiet.
The larger Gigabyte Gaming OC could best result in a peak operating temperature of just 58 degrees and it allowed it to average 1950 MHz for the boost clock. In terms of frame rate performance, it did not make a difference, but driving a little weaker for a small bump in the frequency is a gain for Gigabyte.
At this time, your socks should be properly in place, the GeForce GTX 1650 has been quite underwhelming so far. But to get a clearer picture, let’s look at some comparisons between head and head.
Nvidia continues to compare GTX 1650 with GTX 1050, but 1650 is $ 10 more than launch price of 1050 Ti so that’s no substitute for $ 110 GTX 1050 Compared to 1050 Ti, 1650 is 35% faster on average for some extra money. After three years, a 35% increase at this price point is a kind of underwhelming.
Compared to GTX 1060 3GB (historically a more expensive GPU) GTX 1650 was about 9% slower. Granted 1060 came in at $ 200, but again it is a 3 year GPU. The GTX 1650 offered small performance gains in some titles, but the best case was not even 5% faster than the outgoing Pascal GPU.
Compared to its closest sibling, GTX 1660, the GTX 1650 was 32% slower, which seems good considering it’s 32% cheaper, it works pretty well. At least in a GTX Turing bubble it does. However, as you are looking into this price range, there is quite a lot of competition with AMD lowering prices in response to Nvidia’s latest releases.
Here we have the RX 570 which is a $ 170 part, or at least it was once at a time. For many months, this Radeon GPU has sold for as little as $ 130 and currently there are several options at that price. This makes the GTX 1650 ~ 15% more expensive and yet we found it to be 10% slower on average.
In some titles, the gap was as wide as 20% slower, so in pure values the GTX 1650 cannot compete with Radeon.
Our cost per frame graphics will paint the ultimate image of where the GTX 1650 stands at launch. Two years after the RX 570 was released, we get a GPU that is more expensive per frame.
Although we ignore the incredibly good value of the RX 570, the RX 580 is still a better value thanks to the latest price reductions, giving better performance for a small price premium. We can see that the GTX 1650 offers a similar value than the 1660s, but at under $ 200, where Nvidia faces a tougher competition and where extra frame rates can make a world of difference, it will not be cut to make our recommendation.
At the current $ 150 MSRP, the GTX 1650 is not a bad product, but if you are looking for the best possible rates for every dollar spent, the RX 570 is simply superior. At $ 110, 1650 would have been competitive, not very exciting but at least competitive.
Some will argue that the GTX 1650 is good because it doesn’t need an external power connector, but you squeeze on the straw one. You can upgrade your power supply if needed for about $ 35 to a decent 450-500 watt model and it will worry you. In addition, we noticed that the GTX 1650s lacking an external PCIe power input are clocked lower because they are limited to 75 watts – both MSI and Gigabyte cards tested here had a power connector – which will further affect performance. In other words, you can end up with a very small upgrade over the GTX 1050 Ti.
We have purchased an extra GTX 1650 base card without power connector and will compare it as soon as possible but we doubt that the testing will place the GTX 1650 in better light. For ordinary and affordable GPU options, we saw the appeal of the RTX 2060, GTX 1660 Ti and 1660, at least as we received our recommendations. For less money, the RX 570 lives on.