Arc Graphics 140T vs GeForce GTX 1650

Arc Graphics 140T

2025Boost: 2350 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Arc Graphics 140T

4,500

0.0%

Iris Plus Graphics 650

Iris Plus Graphics G7 (Ice Lake 64 EU)

UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen)

Iris Xe Graphics G7 80EUs

7,869

+74.9%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

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 140T is positioned at rank #330 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 140T

#320

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

844%

#322

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

765%

#323

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

763%

#327

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

694%

#328

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

689%

#330

Arc Graphics 140T

MSRP: $350|Avg: $300

100%

#331

Radeon 680M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $80

99%

#333

GeForce 730A

MSRP: $60|Avg: $20

99%

#334

GeForce GT 745A

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

97%

#335

GeForce 710A

MSRP: $35|Avg: $62

96%

#336

Radeon HD 8670D + HD 6670 Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

95%

#338

GeForce MX230

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

95%

#340

RADEON HD6410D

MSRP: $35|Avg: $5

94%

#341

GeForce 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

94%

#342

Radeon R7 M465X

MSRP: $150|Avg: $45

93%

#344

GeForce 830A

MSRP: $100|Avg: $30

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 140T is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Arc Graphics 140T 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 74.9% 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 140T.

Insight	Arc Graphics 140T	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-74.9%)	✅Leading raw performance (+74.9%)
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 $300 for the Arc Graphics 140T, it costs 75% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 599.5% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Arc Graphics 140T	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+599.5%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300)	✅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.

Arc Graphics 140T Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Arc Graphics 140T and GeForce GTX 1650

Arc Graphics 140T

The Arc Graphics 140T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the Xe+ architecture. The boost clock speed is 2350 MHz. It has 8 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,500 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 140T scores 4,500 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 74.9%. The Arc Graphics 140T is built on Xe+ while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing. Shader units: 8 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 2350 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	4,500	7,869+75%
Architecture	Xe+	Turing
Shading Units	8	896+11100%
Boost Clock	2350 MHz+41%	1665 MHz
L2 Cache	8 MB+700%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	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 140T 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. L2 Cache: 8 MB (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the Arc Graphics 140T has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	Shared	4 GB
Memory Type	Shared	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	System	128 GB/s
Bus Width	System	128-bit
L2 Cache	8 MB+700%	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.2 (Arc Graphics 140T) 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 140T	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 140T) 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 140T) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Arc Graphics 140T	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 140T draws 35W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 72.7% difference. The Arc Graphics 140T is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Arc Graphics 140T) 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 140T	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	35W-53%	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	128.6+23%	104.9

💰

Value Analysis

The Arc Graphics 140T launched at $350 MSRP and currently averages $300, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 75% less ($225 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.0 (Arc Graphics 140T) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 599.3% better value. The Arc Graphics 140T is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).