GeForce GTX 1650 vs Arc A770
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Arc A770
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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.
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar Arc A770
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc A770 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 69.4% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (16 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-69.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+69.4%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🔮Strong Longevity (Alchemist / 6nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (280mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $280 for the Arc A770, it costs 73% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 120.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+120.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($280) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Arc A770
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.
Arc A770
The Arc A770 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in October 12 2022. It features the Generation 12.7 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2100 MHz to 2400 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 6 nm process technology. It features 32 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,332 points. Launch price was $329.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Arc A770's 13,332 — the Arc A770 leads by 69.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Arc A770 uses Generation 12.7, both on 12 nm vs 6 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4,096 (Arc A770). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 19.66 TFLOPS (Arc A770). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2400 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 13,332+69% |
| Architecture | Turing | Generation 12.7 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 6 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 4096+357% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 19.66 TFLOPS+559% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2400 MHz+44% |
| ROPs | 32 | 128+300% |
| TMUs | 56 | 256+357% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 16 MB+1500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | XeSS |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Arc A770 has 16 GB. The Arc A770 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 512 GB/s (Arc A770) — a 300% advantage for the Arc A770. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 16 MB (Arc A770) — the Arc A770 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 512 GB/s+300% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 16 MB+1500% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Arc A770). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Dual Xe Media Engine (Arc A770). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Xe Media Engine. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,AV1,VP9 (Arc A770).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Dual Xe Media Engine |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Xe Media Engine |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,HEVC,AV1,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Arc A770's 225W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (Arc A770). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin + 6-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 280mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-67% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin + 6-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 280mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+77% | 59.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Arc A770 launched at $349 and now averages $280. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 73.2% less ($205 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 47.6 (Arc A770) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 120.4% better value. The Arc A770 is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc A770 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-57% | $349 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-73% | $280 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+120% | 47.6 |
| Codename | TU117 | DG2-512 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | October 12 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #191 |
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 Arc A770
