GeForce GTX 1650 vs Arc B570
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Arc B570
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 B570
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc B570 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Arc B570 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Arc B570 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 78.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 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 B570 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-78.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+78.7%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Xe2 (2024) / 5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (249mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $219 for the Arc B570, it costs 66% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 63.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+63.4%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($219) |
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 B570
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 B570
The Arc B570 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 16 2025. It features the Xe2 architecture. The core clock ranges from 2500 MHz to 2500 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 18 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 14,060 points. Launch price was $219.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Arc B570's 14,060 — the Arc B570 leads by 78.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Arc B570 uses Xe2, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,304 (Arc B570). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.52 TFLOPS (Arc B570). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2500 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 14,060+79% |
| Architecture | Turing | Xe2 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 2304+157% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 11.52 TFLOPS+286% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2500 MHz+50% |
| ROPs | 32 | 80+150% |
| TMUs | 56 | 144+157% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 4.5 MB+411% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 18 MB+1700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 B570 has 8 GB. The Arc B570 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 380 GB/s (Arc B570) — a 196.9% advantage for the Arc B570. Bus width: 128-bit vs 160-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 18 MB (Arc B570) — the Arc B570 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 380 GB/s+197% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 160-bit+25% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 18 MB+1700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Arc B570). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Intel Xe Media (Arc B570). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Intel Xe Media. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 (Arc B570).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Intel Xe Media |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Intel Xe Media |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Arc B570's 150W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 600W (Arc B570). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 249mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-50% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-50% | 600W |
| Power Connector | None | 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 249mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-7% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+12% | 93.7 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Arc B570 launched at $219 and now averages $219. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 65.8% less ($144 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 64.2 (Arc B570) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 63.4% better value. The Arc B570 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc B570 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-32% | $219 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-66% | $219 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+63% | 64.2 |
| Codename | TU117 | BMG-G21 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 16 2025 |
| Ranking | #323 | #169 |
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 B570
