GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 vs GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

2011Core: 783 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

106

3,331

0.0%

GeForce RTX 3050 Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER

GeForce RTX 5060

GeForce GTX 1650

7,869

+136.2%

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. 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

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 GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2011). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 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 136.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2.

Insight	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-136.2%)	✅Leading raw performance (+136.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $30 versus $75 for the GeForce GTX 1650, it costs 60% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 5.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+5.8%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($30)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($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.

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 and GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 15 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 783 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 106W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,331 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 GTS 450 Rev. 2 scores 3,331 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 136.2%. The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is built on Fermi 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 40 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 192 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.6013 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	3,331	7,869+136%
Architecture	Fermi 2.0	Turing
Process Node	40 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	192	896+367%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6013 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+396%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	32	56+75%
L1 Cache	256 KB	896 KB+250%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 comes with 2 GB 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: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	2	3+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP4 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP4 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	PureVideo HD VP4	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP4	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 draws 106W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 34.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 400W (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None. Card length: 210mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 68°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	106W	75W-29%
Recommended PSU	400W	300W-25%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	None
Length	210mm	229mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	68°C-3%	70°C
Perf/Watt	31.4	104.9+234%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 costs 60% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 111.0 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 offers 5.8% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2011).