GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) vs GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
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 GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is positioned at rank #13 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent 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 GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) 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 76.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile).
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-76.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+76.3%) |
| Longevity | Blackwell (2024−2025) (3nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 17.5% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile).
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+17.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($50) | ⚠️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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) and GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 2 2025. It features the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 3 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,463 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 GTX 1050 (Mobile) scores 4,463 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 76.3%. The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is built on Blackwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 3 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 3,584 (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,463 | 7,869+76% |
| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 3 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 3584+300% | 896 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 14.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 128 GB/s+14% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.4+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (6th Gen) (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: NVDEC (3rd Gen) vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (6th Gen) | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | NVDEC (3rd Gen) | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) draws 50W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-33% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | — | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 70°C-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 89.3 | 104.9+17% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) costs 33.3% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 89.3 (GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 17.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $149 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50-33% | $75 |
| Performance per Dollar | 89.3 | 104.9+17% |
| Codename | GN22-X2 | TU117 |
| Release | January 2 2025 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #não classificado | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile) and GeForce GTX 1650
