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 GeForce3 Ti 500 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 GeForce3 Ti 500: 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

✅6866.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Costs $200 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $349 MSRP).
✅Delivers 614280.5% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $349 MSRP).
✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
✅Draws 75W instead of 575W, a 500W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌25.1% longer card at 229mm vs 183mm.

GeForce3 Ti 500

2025

Why buy it

✅Better long-term bet: Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) on 5nm gives it a newer hardware base for upcoming games.
✅Measures 183mm instead of 229mm, a 46mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
✅More future proof: Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌
134.2% HIGHER MSRP
$349 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($349 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌666.7% higher power demand at 575W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 6866.0% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 262200% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 3), so the answer here is pretty clean.

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

GeForce3 Ti 500 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 5nm process instead of 12nm, 170 vs 0 ray-tracing units, and a newer 2025 generation instead of 2019. That gives it the more rounded hardware package for newer games.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $200 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $349, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 614280.5% (52.8 vs 0.0), so the value case lines up with the gaming result. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GeForce GTX 1650 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce3 Ti 500 has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce3 Ti 500 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.

GeForce3 Ti 500

The GeForce3 Ti 500 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 30 2025. It features the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2017 MHz to 2407 MHz. It has 21760 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 575W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 170 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points. Launch price was $1,999.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce3 Ti 500's 3 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 262200%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce3 Ti 500 uses Blackwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 21,760 (GeForce3 Ti 500). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 104.8 TFLOPS (GeForce3 Ti 500). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2407 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
G3D Mark Score	7,869+262200%	3
Architecture	Turing	Blackwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	5 nm
Shading Units	896	21760+2329%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	104.8 TFLOPS+3412%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2407 MHz+45%
ROPs	32	176+450%
TMUs	56	680+1114%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	21.3 MB+2320%
L2 Cache	1 MB	96 MB+9500%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
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 GeForce3 Ti 500 carries 512 MB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 700% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the GeForce3 Ti 500. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 96 MB (GeForce3 Ti 500) — the GeForce3 Ti 500 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	96 MB+9500%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.1 (GeForce3 Ti 500). Vulkan: 1.4 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 1.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
DirectX	12+48%	8.1
Vulkan	1.4	N/A
OpenGL	4.6+207%	1.5
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs None (GeForce3 Ti 500). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs MPEG-2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce3 Ti 500).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	None
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	MPEG-2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce3 Ti 500's 575W — a 153.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce3 Ti 500). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 183mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
TDP	75W-87%	575W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	183mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80
Perf/Watt	104.9	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the GeForce3 Ti 500 launched at $349. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 57.3% cheaper ($200 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.0 (GeForce3 Ti 500) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% better value. The newer card here is GeForce3 Ti 500 (2025 vs 2019).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce3 Ti 500
MSRP	$149-57%	$349
Performance per Dollar	52.8	0.0
Codename	TU117	GB202
Release	April 23 2019	January 30 2025
Ranking	#323	#3

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search GeForce3 Ti 500 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.