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 GTX 1650 Max-Q vs GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 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 GTX 1650 Max-Q vs GeForce RTX 4070 Ti: 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 GTX 1650 Max-Q

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 30W instead of 285W, a 255W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 Ti across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 12 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 39.5 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $799 MSRP).

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti

2023

Why buy it

✅278.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 39.5 vs 0 G3D/$ ($799 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
✅200% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (12 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Better long-term bet: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 4nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌850% higher power demand at 285W vs 30W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 278.3% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 400.1% in PassMark G3D (31,578 vs 6,314), so the answer here is pretty clean.

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

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 12 GB vs 4 GB of VRAM, the newer feature stack, with DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution (2023) and DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023), while GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is limited to no meaningful modern upscaling stack and no comparable frame-generation support, a 4nm process instead of 12nm, and 60 vs 0 ray-tracing units. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup.

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Technical Specifications

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

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1125 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,314 points.

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti

The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 3 2023. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 2310 MHz to 2610 MHz. It has 7680 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 285W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 60 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 31,578 points. Launch price was $799.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q scores 6,314 versus the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti's 31,578 — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti leads by 400.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is built on Turing while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti uses Ada Lovelace, both on 12 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 7,680 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti). Raw compute: 2.304 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 40.09 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti). Boost clocks: 1125 MHz vs 2610 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
G3D Mark Score	6,314	31,578+400%
Architecture	Turing	Ada Lovelace
Process Node	12 nm	4 nm
Shading Units	1024	7680+650%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.304 TFLOPS	40.09 TFLOPS+1640%
Boost Clock	1125 MHz	2610 MHz+132%
ROPs	32	80+150%
TMUs	64	240+275%
L1 Cache	1 MB	7.5 MB+650%
L2 Cache	1 MB	48 MB+4700%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The clearest feature edge for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. In games that support it, that can smooth out motion and lift perceived FPS. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q does not have comparable native support in the same tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti supports the newer DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution, whereas the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is capped at Upscaling support.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution
Frame Generation	Not Supported	DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation
Ray Reconstruction	No	Yes (DLSS 3.5)
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q has 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti carries 12 GB. GeForce RTX 4070 Ti gives you 200% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 504 GB/s (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) — a 350% advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and 192-bit on the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 48 MB (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti) — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	12 GB+200%
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6X
Memory Bandwidth	112 GB/s	504 GB/s+350%
Bus Width	128-bit	192-bit+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB	48 MB+4700%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 Ultimate
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs NVENC (8th Gen) (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs NVDEC (5th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs AV1,H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	NVENC (8th Gen)
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	NVDEC (5th Gen)
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	AV1,H.264,H.265,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q draws 30W versus the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti's 285W — a 161.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 700W (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti). Power connectors: Mobile vs 8-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
TDP	30W-89%	285W
Recommended PSU	350W-50%	700W
Power Connector	Mobile	8-pin
Length	—	285mm
Height	—	112mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	70°C-7%
Perf/Watt	210.5+90%	110.8

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is GeForce RTX 4070 Ti (2023 vs 2019).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce RTX 4070 Ti
MSRP	—	$799
Codename	TU117	AD104
Release	April 23 2019	January 3 2023
Ranking	#383	#11

Search GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q on Amazon

Search GeForce RTX 4070 Ti 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.