
Arc Graphics 130T vs GeForce GTX 1650

Arc Graphics 130T
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Arc Graphics 130T
Performance Per Dollar
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.
| Insight | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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.
| Insight | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

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

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.

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).
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,208 | 7,869+27% |
| Architecture | Xe+ | Turing |
| Shading Units | 7 | 896+12700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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).
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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.
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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).
| Feature | Arc Graphics 130T | GeForce 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 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











