GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST vs GeForce GTX 1650

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2013). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 130.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST.

Insight	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-130.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+130.4%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 53.6% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST.

Insight	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+53.6%)
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($50)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST and GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 26 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 134W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,415 points. Launch price was $169.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST scores 3,415 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 130.4%. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 1.585 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	3,415	7,869+130%
Architecture	Kepler	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	768	896+17%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.585 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+88%
Boost Clock	1033 MHz	1665 MHz+61%
ROPs	24	32+33%
TMUs	64+14%	56
L1 Cache	64 KB	896 KB+1300%
L2 Cache	0.38 MB	1 MB+163%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.38 MB (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.38 MB	1 MB+163%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (FL 11_0)	12
Vulkan	1.1	1.4+27%
OpenGL	4.4	4.6+5%
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo VP5 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	NVENC 1st gen	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo VP5	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST draws 134W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 56.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None. Card length: 241mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 97°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	134W	75W-44%
Recommended PSU	450W	300W-33%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	None
Length	241mm	229mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	97°C	70°C-28%
Perf/Watt	25.5	104.9+311%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST launched at $169 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST costs 33.3% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 68.3 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 53.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).