
GeForce GTX 1650

TITAN RTX
GeForce GTX 1650 vs TITAN RTX 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 TITAN RTX 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 TITAN RTX: 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 $2,350 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 556.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 8.0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $2,499 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 280W, a 205W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than TITAN RTX across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 24 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.
TITAN RTX
2018Why buy it
- ✅206.7% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅500% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (24 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 24 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
- ❌1577.2% HIGHER MSRP$2,499 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($2,499 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌273.3% higher power demand at 280W 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 TITAN RTX 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.

TITAN RTX
The TITAN RTX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 18 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1770 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 280W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 20,095 points. Launch price was $2,499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the TITAN RTX's 20,095 — the TITAN RTX leads by 155.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the TITAN RTX uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4,608 (TITAN RTX). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 16.31 TFLOPS (TITAN RTX). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1770 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 20,095+155% |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 4608+414% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 16.31 TFLOPS+447% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1770 MHz+6% |
| ROPs | 32 | 96+200% |
| TMUs | 56 | 288+414% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 4.5 MB+411% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 6 MB+500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TITAN RTX carries 24 GB. TITAN RTX gives you 500% 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 672 GB/s (TITAN RTX) — a 425% advantage for the TITAN RTX. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 384-bit on the TITAN RTX. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6 MB (TITAN RTX) — the TITAN RTX has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 24 GB+500% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 672 GB/s+425% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 6 MB+500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (TITAN RTX). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate |
| 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 (7th Gen) (TITAN RTX). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC (4th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (TITAN RTX).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC (7th Gen) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | NVDEC (4th Gen) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the TITAN RTX's 280W — a 115.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (TITAN RTX). Power connectors: None vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-73% | 280W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 116mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+46% | 71.8 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the TITAN RTX launched at $2499. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 94% cheaper ($2350 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.0 (TITAN RTX) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 560% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2018).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN RTX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-94% | $2499 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+560% | 8.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | TU102 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | December 18 2018 |
| Ranking | #323 | #91 |
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.















