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.

GeForce 920A vs GeForce GTX 1650 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce 920A vs GeForce GTX 1650: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce 920A

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $49 less on MSRP ($100 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Draws 33W instead of 75W, a 42W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2015 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($100 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

✅429.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 537.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 8.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
✅GeForce 920A is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌127.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 33W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 429.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 849.2% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 829), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 512 MB of VRAM, a 12nm process instead of 28nm, and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2015. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $49 more expensive on MSRP at $149 vs $100, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 537.1% (52.8 vs 8.3), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce 920A vs GeForce GTX 1650 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce 920A

The GeForce 920A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 941 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 829 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 GeForce 920A scores 829 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 849.2%. The GeForce 920A is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 920A) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce 920A) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 941 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	829	7,869+849%
Architecture	Maxwell	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	384	896+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7227 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+313%
Boost Clock	941 MHz	1665 MHz+77%
ROPs	8	32+300%
TMUs	24	56+133%
L1 Cache	192 KB	896 KB+367%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce 920A has 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 carries 4 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 700% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce 920A and 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650.

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	4 GB+700%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.0 (GeForce 920A) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	11.0	12+9%
Vulkan	1.1	1.4+27%
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	1	3+200%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 920A) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 (GeForce 920A) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	No	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP5	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 920A draws 33W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 920A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 920A) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Legacy vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	33W-56%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Legacy	None
Length	0mm	229mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	70°C	70°C
Perf/Watt	25.1	104.9+318%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce 920A came in at $100, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce 920A was 32.9% cheaper ($49 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 8.3 (GeForce 920A) vs 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 536.1% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2015).

Feature	GeForce 920A	GeForce GTX 1650
MSRP	$100-33%	$149
Performance per Dollar	8.3	52.8+536%
Codename	GM108	TU117
Release	March 13 2015	April 23 2019
Ranking	#810	#323

Search GeForce 920A on Amazon

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.