GeForce GTX 1650
VS
GeForce 210

GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 210

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce 210

2019Core: 937 MHzBoost: 1038 MHz

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.

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 GeForce 210

#589
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
3934%
#591
3566%
#592
3557%
#596
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
3234%
#597
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
3212%
#599
GeForce 210
MSRP: $50|Avg: $5
100%
#600
Mobility Radeon X1900
MSRP: $49|Avg: $15
100%
#601
Mobility Radeon HD 4330
MSRP: $49|Avg: $49
100%
#602
Radeon R7 M365X
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
100%
#603
Mobility Radeon HD 5870
MSRP: $399|Avg: $50
99%
#604
Radeon R7 M260DX
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
99%
#605
Radeon HD 8610G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
97%
#606
95%
#607
Radeon HD 4650 AGP
MSRP: $80|Avg: $20
94%
#608
GeForce 9800M GS
MSRP: $200|Avg: $50
94%
#609
Radeon R7 M270
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
93%
#610
GeForce 9800 GTX
MSRP: $299|Avg: $30
93%
#611
Mobility Radeon HD 5850
MSRP: $299|Avg: $30
92%
#612
92%
#614
GeForce 205
MSRP: $50|Avg: $15
91%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5602.2% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (4 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 210.

InsightGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
Performance
Leading raw performance (+5602.2%)
Lower raw frame rates (-5602.2%)
Longevity
Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
✅ More VRAM (+300%)
❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
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 $5), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 280.1% better value per dollar than the GeForce 210.

InsightGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+280.1%)
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)
More affordable ($5)

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 GeForce 210

NVIDIA

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.

NVIDIA

GeForce 210

The GeForce 210 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 138 points.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce 210's 138 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 5602.2%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce 210 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (GeForce 210). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 210). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
G3D Mark Score
7,869+5602%
138
Architecture
Turing
Pascal
Process Node
12 nm
14 nm
Shading Units
896+133%
384
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.984 TFLOPS+274%
0.7972 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1665 MHz+60%
1038 MHz
ROPs
32+100%
16
TMUs
56+133%
24
L1 Cache
896 KB+522%
144 KB
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
0.5 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
Upscaling Tech
FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation
FSR 3 (Compatible)
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
Standard
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 210 has 1 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 210) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
VRAM Capacity
4 GB+300%
1 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
128 GB/s
Unknown
Bus Width
128-bit
128-bit
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
0.5 MB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.1 (GeForce 210). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
DirectX
12+19%
10.1
OpenGL
4.6+39%
3.3
Max Displays
3+50%
2
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs None (GeForce 210). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 210).

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
Encoder
NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
None
Decoder
NVDEC 4th gen
PureVideo VP4
Codecs
H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9
MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce 210's 10W — a 152.9% difference. The GeForce 210 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce 210). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
TDP
75W
10W-87%
Recommended PSU
300W-14%
350W
Power Connector
None
Legacy
Length
229mm
168mm
Height
111mm
69mm
Slots
2
1-50%
Temp (Load)
70°C-7%
75°C
Perf/Watt
104.9+660%
13.8
💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce 210 launched at $50 and now averages $5. The GeForce 210 costs 93.3% less ($70 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 27.6 (GeForce 210) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 280.1% better value.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce 210
MSRP
$149
$50-66%
Avg Price (30d)
$75
$5-93%
Performance per Dollar
104.9+280%
27.6
Codename
TU117
GP108B
Release
April 23 2019
February 20 2019
Ranking
#323
#643