GeForce GTX 1650 vs Arc Graphics 140T
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Arc Graphics 140T
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 Graphics 140T
Why is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Arc Graphics 140T?
The battle between the integrated Intel Arc Graphics 140T and the dedicated GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER highlights the divide between modern mobile efficiency and older budget legacy muscle. The GTX 1650 SUPER, although older, still maintains a performance lead in raw gaming rasterization thanks to its dedicated GDDR6 memory and higher power envelope. However, the Arc 140T offers surprising competence for modern codecs and low-power versatility.
Technically, the GTX 1650 SUPER features its own 4GB VRAM buffer, which allows it to handle 1080p gaming with more stability than an integrated chip that shares system RAM. The Arc 140T is built on a much newer architecture, offering better support for AV1 encoding and modern AI-driven multimedia features. For a user with a legacy budget desktop, the 1650 SUPER still provides a better gaming frame rate, while the Arc 140T is the choice for modern, ultra-portable notebooks.
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the winner for gamers on older hardware who need consistent 1080p performance for e-sports titles. The Intel Arc Graphics 140T is the winner for mobile professionals who need efficient, modern media handling in a slim device. While the 1650 SUPER is the faster gaming card, the Arc 140T represents the impressive capabilities of current integrated graphics solutions.
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Arc Graphics 140T is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The Arc Graphics 140T 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 GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 74.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Arc Graphics 140T.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+74.9%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-74.9%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | Xe+ (2025) (Standard Node) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $300 for the Arc Graphics 140T, it costs 75% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 599.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+599.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($300) |
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 Graphics 140T
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 Graphics 140T
The Arc Graphics 140T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the Xe+ architecture. The boost clock speed is 2350 MHz. It has 8 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 35W. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,500 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Arc Graphics 140T's 4,500 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 74.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Arc Graphics 140T uses Xe+. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8 (Arc Graphics 140T). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2350 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+75% | 4,500 |
| Architecture | Turing | Xe+ |
| Shading Units | 896+11100% | 8 |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2350 MHz+41% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 8 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Graphics 140T has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs System. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8 MB (Arc Graphics 140T) — the Arc Graphics 140T has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | Shared |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 8 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (Arc Graphics 140T). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Xe Media Engine (Arc Graphics 140T). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Xe Media Engine. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 (Arc Graphics 140T).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Xe Media Engine |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Xe Media Engine |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,H.266 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Arc Graphics 140T's 35W — a 72.7% difference. The Arc Graphics 140T is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Arc Graphics 140T). Power connectors: None vs Integrated. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 35W-53% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Integrated |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 128.6+23% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Arc Graphics 140T launched at $350 and now averages $300. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 75% less ($225 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 15.0 (Arc Graphics 140T) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 599.3% better value. The Arc Graphics 140T is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Arc Graphics 140T |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-57% | $350 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-75% | $300 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+599% | 15.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | — |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #323 | #409 |
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 Graphics 140T
