GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce G 103M

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 G 103M

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

1727%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1659%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

1640%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1637%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1634%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

1625%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

1604%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1598%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1583%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

1579%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

1560%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

1557%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

1529%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

1528%

#237

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

1905%

#252

GeForce G 103M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#253

Radeon R5 220

MSRP: $35|Avg: $15

100%

#254

Radeon HD 7350

MSRP: $40|Avg: $10

98%

#255

GeForce GTX 285

MSRP: $359|Avg: $30

98%

#256

Radeon HD 7570

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

96%

#257

Radeon HD 6380G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

96%

#258

Radeon HD 4550

MSRP: $59|Avg: $15

95%

#259

RADEON HD7450

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

95%

#260

GeForce GT 330

MSRP: $99|Avg: $30

95%

#262

Radeon HD 7340G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

93%

#263

Radeon HD 8210E

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

92%

#264

Radeon 535DX

MSRP: $200|Avg: $40

92%

#266

GeForce GT 120 / 9500 GT

MSRP: $85|Avg: $15

91%

#267

GeForce GT 130

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

91%

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 G 103M 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 12390.5% 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 G 103M.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+12390.5%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-12390.5%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))
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	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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 G 103M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce G 103M

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 G 103M

The GeForce G 103M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 63 points. Launch price was $79.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce G 103M's 63 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 12390.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce G 103M uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (GeForce G 103M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce G 103M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1468 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
G3D Mark Score	7,869+12390%	63
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+165%	1.127 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+13%	1468 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)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
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 G 103M 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. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce G 103M) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
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+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.0 (GeForce G 103M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs None. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 1.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
DirectX	12+20%	10.0
Vulkan	1.4	None
OpenGL	4.6+39%	3.3
Max Displays	3+200%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs No (GeForce G 103M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce G 103M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	No
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP3
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce G 103M's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The GeForce G 103M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce G 103M). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce G 103M
TDP	75W	30W-60%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-7%	75°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+4895%	2.1