GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX TITAN Black
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Black Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Black 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Black: 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
2019Why buy it
- ✅Costs $850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 474.9% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 9.2 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅GeForce GTX TITAN Black is already legacy-tier future-proofing, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 250W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX TITAN Black across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
GeForce GTX TITAN Black
2014Why buy it
- ✅22.1% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌2014 hardware with 6 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
- ❌570.5% HIGHER MSRP$999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 9.2 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌233.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 75W.
- ❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX TITAN Black Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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.
GeForce GTX TITAN Black
The GeForce GTX TITAN Black is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 18 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 889 MHz to 980 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,177 points. Launch price was $999.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX TITAN Black's 9,177 — the GeForce GTX TITAN Black leads by 16.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX TITAN Black uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,880 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.645 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX TITAN Black). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 980 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 9,177+17% |
| Architecture | Turing | Kepler |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 2880+221% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 5.645 TFLOPS+89% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+70% | 980 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 48+50% |
| TMUs | 56 | 240+329% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+273% | 240 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX TITAN Black carries 6 GB. GeForce GTX TITAN Black gives you 50% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 336 GB/s (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) — a 162.5% advantage for the GeForce GTX TITAN Black. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 384-bit on the GeForce GTX TITAN Black. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) — the GeForce GTX TITAN Black has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 6 GB+50% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 336 GB/s+163% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1.5 MB+50% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.0 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 1.0 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP5. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC 1.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | PureVideo HD VP5 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX TITAN Black's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 600W (GeForce GTX TITAN Black). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-70% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-50% | 600W |
| Power Connector | None | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+186% | 36.7 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the GeForce GTX TITAN Black launched at $999. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 85.1% cheaper ($850 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 9.2 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 473.9% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX TITAN Black |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-85% | $999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+474% | 9.2 |
| Codename | TU117 | GK110B |
| Release | April 23 2019 | February 18 2014 |
| Ranking | #323 | #288 |
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.
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 and GeForce GTX TITAN Black
