GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 9300

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 9300

#622

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

5121%

#624

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

4642%

#625

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

4630%

#629

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

4210%

#630

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

4182%

#632

Mobility Radeon HD 560v

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

100%

#633

GeForce 9300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $20

100%

#634

Qualcomm Adreno X1-45 GPU

MSRP: $899|Avg: $400

99%

#635

GeForce 8400M G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $20

99%

#636

Mobility Radeon HD 2400 XT

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

98%

#637

GeForce 8400M GS

MSRP: $50|Avg: $20

98%

#638

GeForce 9100

MSRP: $40|Avg: $5

97%

#639

GeForce 8300

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

96%

#640

GeForce 9600M GT

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

96%

#641

Mobility Radeon HD 3430

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

94%

#642

Mobility Radeon HD serie 4200

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

93%

#643

GeForce 9500 GS

MSRP: $110|Avg: $10

92%

#644

GeForce 9300GE

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

92%

#645

Mobility Radeon HD 3470 Hybrid X2

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

91%

#646

Mobility Radeon HD 4270

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

90%

#647

GeForce 9500 GT

MSRP: $99|Avg: $15

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 9300 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 6096.1% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9300.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+6096.1%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-6096.1%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+700%)	❌ 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 $20), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 1552.3% better value per dollar than the GeForce 9300.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1552.3%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($20)

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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

GeForce 9300 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce 9300

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.

GeForce 9300

The GeForce 9300 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 941 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 127 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce 9300's 127 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 6096.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce 9300 uses Maxwell, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (GeForce 9300). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce 9300). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 941 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
G3D Mark Score	7,869+6096%	127
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+313%	0.7227 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+77%	941 MHz
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	56+133%	24
L1 Cache	896 KB+367%	192 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
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 9300 has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9300). Vulkan: 1.4 vs N/A. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
DirectX	12+8%	11.1 (10_0)
Vulkan	1.4	N/A
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 9300). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD (VP2). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce 9300).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	None
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD (VP2)
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce 9300's 33W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 9300 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce 9300). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 9300
TDP	75W	33W-56%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	229mm	168mm
Height	111mm	69mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80
Perf/Watt	104.9+2661%	3.8

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce 9300 launched at $60 and now averages $20. The GeForce 9300 costs 73.3% less ($55 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6.3 (GeForce 9300) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1565.1% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).