GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce4 Ti 4400
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce4 Ti 4400 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 GeForce4 Ti 4400 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 GeForce4 Ti 4400: 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
- ✅6866.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $150 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 225483% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $299 MSRP).
- ✅700% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 512 MB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 450W, a 375W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
GeForce4 Ti 4400
2022Why buy it
- ✅Measures 216mm instead of 229mm, a 13mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) 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.
- ❌100.7% HIGHER MSRP$299 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($299 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌500% higher power demand at 450W vs 75W.
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 GeForce4 Ti 4400 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.
GeForce4 Ti 4400
The GeForce4 Ti 4400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2022. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 2235 MHz to 2520 MHz. It has 16384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 450W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 128 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7 points. Launch price was $1,599.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce4 Ti 4400's 7 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 112314.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce4 Ti 4400 uses Ada Lovelace, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 16,384 (GeForce4 Ti 4400). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 82.58 TFLOPS (GeForce4 Ti 4400). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2520 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+112314% | 7 |
| Architecture | Turing | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 16384+1729% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 82.58 TFLOPS+2667% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2520 MHz+51% |
| ROPs | 32 | 176+450% |
| TMUs | 56 | 512+814% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 16 MB+1718% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 72 MB+7100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GeForce4 Ti 4400 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 GeForce4 Ti 4400. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 72 MB (GeForce4 Ti 4400) — the GeForce4 Ti 4400 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+700% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 72 MB+7100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.1 (GeForce4 Ti 4400). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12+48% | 8.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+254% | 1.3 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs None (GeForce4 Ti 4400). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs MPEG-2 Decoder. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce4 Ti 4400).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | None |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | MPEG-2 Decoder |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce4 Ti 4400's 450W — a 142.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce4 Ti 4400). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 216mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 65°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-83% | 450W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 216mm |
| Height | 111mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 2 | 1-50% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C | 65°C-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the GeForce4 Ti 4400 launched at $299. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 50.2% cheaper ($150 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.0 (GeForce4 Ti 4400) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% better value. The newer card here is GeForce4 Ti 4400 (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce4 Ti 4400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-50% | $299 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8 | 0.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | AD102 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | September 20 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #4 |
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 GeForce4 Ti 4400
