GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs GeForce GTX 980M
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 980M
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. 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 1650 Ti
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 980M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 980M.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti holds the technical lead. Priced at $77 (vs $80), it costs 4% less, resulting in a 6.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+6.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($77) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($80) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and GeForce GTX 980M
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 9 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 928 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,525 points. Launch price was $149.
GeForce GTX 980M
The GeForce GTX 980M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 7 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1038 MHz to 1127 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,353 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the GeForce GTX 980M reaches 7,353 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 980M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1,536 (GeForce GTX 980M). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1.659 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 980M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525+2% | 7,353 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1536+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 1.659 TFLOPS+16% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 64 | 96+50% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 576 KB+800% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 video memory. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 160 GB/s (GeForce GTX 980M) — a 20% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 980M) — the GeForce GTX 980M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s+20% | 160 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 980M). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+18% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs NVENC 2.0 (GeForce GTX 980M). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce GTX 980M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | NVENC 2.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the GeForce GTX 980M's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 980M). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-50% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+105% | 73.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 3.8% less ($3 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 91.9 (GeForce GTX 980M) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 6.3% better value. The GeForce GTX 980M is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | GeForce GTX 980M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $77-4% | $80 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.7+6% | 91.9 |
| Codename | GK106 | GM204 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | October 7 2014 |
| Ranking | #633 | #344 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and GeForce GTX 980M
