GeForce GTX 1650
Titan X Pascal
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Titan X Pascal 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 X Pascal 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 X Pascal: 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 $1,050 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,199 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 363.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 11.4 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,199 MSRP).
- ✅Titan X Pascal 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 Titan X Pascal across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 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 X Pascal
2016Why buy it
- ✅94.2% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
Trade-offs
- ❌2016 hardware with 8 GB of VRAM already sits in legacy territory for modern games.
- ❌704.7% HIGHER MSRP$1,199 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 11.4 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($1,199 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 Titan X Pascal 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 X Pascal
The Titan X Pascal is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 2 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1417 MHz to 1531 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,660 points. Launch price was $1,199.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Titan X Pascal's 13,660 — the Titan X Pascal leads by 73.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Titan X Pascal uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,584 (Titan X Pascal). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.97 TFLOPS (Titan X Pascal). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1531 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 13,660+74% |
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 3584+300% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 10.97 TFLOPS+268% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+9% | 1531 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 96+200% |
| TMUs | 56 | 224+300% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 1.3 MB+48% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Titan X Pascal leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | Upscaling support |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Titan X Pascal carries 8 GB. Titan X Pascal gives you 100% 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 480 GB/s (Titan X Pascal) — a 275% advantage for the Titan X Pascal. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 384-bit on the Titan X Pascal. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3 MB (Titan X Pascal) — the Titan X Pascal has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5X |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 480 GB/s+275% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 384-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Titan X Pascal). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+27% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 5.0 (2x) (Titan X Pascal). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP8. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Titan X Pascal).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC 5.0 (2x) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | PureVideo HD VP8 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Titan X Pascal's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 600W (Titan X Pascal). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin + 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-70% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-50% | 600W |
| Power Connector | None | 6-pin + 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+92% | 54.6 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Titan X Pascal launched at $1199. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 87.6% cheaper ($1050 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.4 (Titan X Pascal) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 363.2% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Titan X Pascal |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-88% | $1199 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+363% | 11.4 |
| Codename | TU117 | GP102 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | August 2 2016 |
| Ranking | #323 | #198 |
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 Titan X Pascal
