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 RTX 2050 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 vs GeForce RTX 2050: 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

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $1 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 215W, a 140W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 2050 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

GeForce RTX 2050

2018

Why buy it

✅45.9% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌
0.7% HIGHER MSRP
$150 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌186.7% higher power demand at 215W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce RTX 2050 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 45.9% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward GeForce GTX 1650 instead at 7,869 vs 7,714, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

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

GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a newer 2019 generation instead of 2018. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $1 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $150, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 2.7% (52.8 vs 51.4), which is enough to swing the recommendation its way. GeForce RTX 2050 still makes more sense if max raw gaming performance matters more than value.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce RTX 2050 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 RTX 2050

The GeForce RTX 2050 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,714 points. Launch price was $699.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 and the GeForce RTX 2050 reaches 7,714 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce RTX 2050 uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,944 (GeForce RTX 2050). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2050). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1710 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
G3D Mark Score	7,869+2%	7,714
Architecture	Turing	Turing
Process Node	12 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	896	2944+229%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	10.07 TFLOPS+237%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	1710 MHz+3%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	184+229%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	2.9 MB+230%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce RTX 2050 supports the newer DLSS 2 Super Resolution, whereas the GeForce GTX 1650 is capped at Upscaling support.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	DLSS 2 Super Resolution
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 112 GB/s (GeForce RTX 2050) — a 14.3% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the GeForce RTX 2050. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (GeForce RTX 2050) — the GeForce RTX 2050 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s+14%	112 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 2050). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
DirectX	12	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 8.0 (GeForce RTX 2050). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP11. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (GeForce RTX 2050).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 8.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP11
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode)

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce RTX 2050's 215W — a 96.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 300W (GeForce RTX 2050). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
TDP	75W-65%	215W
Recommended PSU	300W	300W
Power Connector	None	6-pin
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+192%	35.9

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the GeForce RTX 2050 launched at $150. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 0.7% cheaper ($1 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 51.4 (GeForce RTX 2050) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 2.7% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2018).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce RTX 2050
MSRP	$149	$150
Performance per Dollar	52.8+3%	51.4
Codename	TU117	TU104
Release	April 23 2019	September 20 2018
Ranking	#323	#94

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search GeForce RTX 2050 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.