Arc Graphics 130T
VS
GeForce GTX 1650

Arc Graphics 130T vs GeForce GTX 1650

Intel

Arc Graphics 130T

2025
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Arc Graphics 130T is positioned at rank #239 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Arc Graphics 130T

#54
Radeon RX 6800S
MSRP: $800|Avg: $800
96%
#229
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
525%
#231
476%
#232
474%
#236
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
431%
#237
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
428%
#239
Arc Graphics 130T
MSRP: $300|Avg: $250
100%
#240
GeForce MX570 A
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
100%
#242
GeForce GT 645
MSRP: $99|Avg: $15
98%
#252
GeForce 720A
MSRP: $30|Avg: $30
93%
#253
GeForce GT 520M
MSRP: $60|Avg: N/A
91%
#254
91%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Arc Graphics 130T is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Arc Graphics 130T likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 26.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Arc Graphics 130T.

InsightArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-26.8%)
Leading raw performance (+26.8%)
Longevity
Xe+ (2025) (Standard Node)
Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
❌ Less VRAM capacity
✅ More VRAM (+100+%)
Efficiency
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit
📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $250 for the Arc Graphics 130T, it costs 70% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 322.5% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Better overall value (+322.5%)
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($250)
More affordable ($75)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Arc Graphics 130T and GeForce GTX 1650

Intel

Arc Graphics 130T

The Arc Graphics 130T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the Xe+ architecture. It has 7 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,208 points.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Arc Graphics 130T scores 6,208 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 26.8%. The Arc Graphics 130T is built on Xe+ while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing. Shader units: 7 (Arc Graphics 130T) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650).

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score
6,208
7,869+27%
Architecture
Xe+
Turing
Shading Units
7
896+12700%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech
XeSS
FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation
FSR 3 (Compatible)
FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The Arc Graphics 130T comes with 0 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: System vs 128-bit.

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity
Shared
4 GB
Memory Type
Shared
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
System
128 GB/s
Bus Width
System
128-bit
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc Graphics 130T) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
DirectX
12.2+2%
12
Vulkan
1.3
1.4+8%
OpenGL
4.6
4.6
Max Displays
3
3
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Xe Media Engine (Arc Graphics 130T) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: Xe Media Engine vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 (Arc Graphics 130T) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
Encoder
Xe Media Engine
NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder
Xe Media Engine
NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs
H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266
H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Arc Graphics 130T draws 15W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 133.3% difference. The Arc Graphics 130T is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 130T) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Integrated vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
TDP
15W-80%
75W
Recommended PSU
350W
300W-14%
Power Connector
Integrated
None
Length
0mm
229mm
Height
0mm
111mm
Slots
0-100%
2
Temp (Load)
85°C
70°C-18%
Perf/Watt
413.9+295%
104.9
💰

Value Analysis

The Arc Graphics 130T launched at $300 MSRP and currently averages $250, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 70% less ($175 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 24.8 (Arc Graphics 130T) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 323% better value. The Arc Graphics 130T is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).

FeatureArc Graphics 130TGeForce GTX 1650
MSRP
$300
$149-50%
Avg Price (30d)
$250
$75-70%
Performance per Dollar
24.8
104.9+323%
Codename
TU117
Release
January 6 2025
April 23 2019
Ranking
#386
#323