GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
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 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank #160 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower 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 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Performance Per Dollar GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 80.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-80.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+80.9%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 with Max-Q Design and GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1755 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 130W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 20 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 11,892 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 versus the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM's 11,892 — the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM leads by 80.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM uses Ampere, both on 12 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2,560 (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 8.986 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1755 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,574 | 11,892+81% |
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024 | 2560+150% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.458 TFLOPS | 8.986 TFLOPS+266% |
| Boost Clock | 1200 MHz | 1755 MHz+46% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 80+25% |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | 2.5 MB+150% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 224 GB/s (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM) — a 16.7% advantage for the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2 MB (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM) — the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s | 224 GB/s+17% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 8th Gen NVENC (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Turing) | 8th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | NVDEC (4th Gen) | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the GeForce RTX 3050 OEM's 130W — a 88.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 450W (GeForce RTX 3050 OEM). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 8-pin. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-62% | 130W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-22% | 450W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 8-pin |
| Length | — | 235mm |
| Height | — | 124mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 131.5+44% | 91.5 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3050 OEM is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2020).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design | GeForce RTX 3050 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $249 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $150 |
| Codename | TU117 | GA106 |
| Release | April 2 2020 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #371 | #224 |
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 with Max-Q Design and GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
