
GeForce GTX 950

GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 950 vs GeForce GTX 1650 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 950 vs GeForce GTX 1650 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 950 vs GeForce GTX 1650: 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 950
2015Why buy it
- ✅Measures 202mm instead of 229mm, a 27mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2015 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
- ❌6.7% HIGHER MSRP$159 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 33.7 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($159 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Why buy it
- ✅63.6% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $10 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $159 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 56.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 33.7 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $159 MSRP).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅GeForce GTX 950 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
- ❌13.4% longer card at 229mm vs 202mm.
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 950 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GTX 950
The GeForce GTX 950 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 20 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1024 MHz to 1188 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 90W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,357 points. Launch price was $159.

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 950 scores 5,357 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 46.9%. The GeForce GTX 950 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 950) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 1.825 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 950) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1188 MHz vs 1665 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,357 | 7,869+47% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 896+17% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.825 TFLOPS | 2.984 TFLOPS+64% |
| Boost Clock | 1188 MHz | 1665 MHz+40% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 48 | 56+17% |
| L1 Cache | 288 KB | 896 KB+211% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 950 has 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 carries 4 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bandwidth: 106 GB/s (GeForce GTX 950) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 20.8% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 950 and 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 106 GB/s | 128 GB/s+21% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (GeForce GTX 950) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 2nd Gen (GeForce GTX 950) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: NVDEC 2nd Gen vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (GeForce GTX 950) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 2nd Gen | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 2nd Gen | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 950 draws 90W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 18.2% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 950) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs None. Card length: 202mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 90W | 75W-17% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | None |
| Length | 202mm | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 59.5 | 104.9+76% |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce GTX 950 came in at $159, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 6.3% cheaper ($10 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 33.7 (GeForce GTX 950) vs 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 56.7% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 950 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $159 | $149-6% |
| Performance per Dollar | 33.7 | 52.8+57% |
| Codename | GM206 | TU117 |
| Release | August 20 2015 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #425 | #323 |
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.















