GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GT 820M

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 GT 820M

#39

Radeon RX 7700S

MSRP: $449|Avg: $350

96%

#124

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

300%

#126

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

272%

#127

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

272%

#131

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

247%

#132

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

245%

#134

GeForce GT 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#139

Iris Xe MAX Graphics

MSRP: $55|Avg: $40

99%

#145

Radeon RX 580 (móvel)

MSRP: $229|Avg: $65

97%

#147

GeForce GT 630M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $35

96%

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 GT 820M 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 1351.8% 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 GT 820M.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1351.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1351.8%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
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 GT 820M Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GT 820M

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 GT 820M

The GeForce GT 820M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 7 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1038 MHz to 1127 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 542 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GT 820M's 542 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 1351.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GT 820M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,536 (GeForce GT 820M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.659 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 820M). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1127 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
G3D Mark Score	7,869+1352%	542
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1536+71%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+80%	1.659 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+48%	1127 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	96+71%
L1 Cache	896 KB+56%	576 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
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 GT 820M has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (GeForce GT 820M) — the GeForce GT 820M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.0 (GeForce GT 820M). Vulkan: 1.4 vs None. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.0. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 1.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
DirectX	12+9%	11.0
Vulkan	1.4	None
OpenGL	4.6+15%	4.0
Max Displays	3+200%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs No (GeForce GT 820M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP (GeForce GT 820M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	No
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP4
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1,MPEG-4 ASP

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GT 820M's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce GT 820M). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GT 820M
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	70°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+1843%	5.4