GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
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 GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
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 GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25.1% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-25.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+25.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $150 for the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design, it costs 50% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 59.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+59.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) |
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 GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
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 GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 27 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1215 MHz to 1379 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 115W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,842 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design's 9,842 — the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design leads by 25.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,048 (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.648 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1379 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 9,842+25% |
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 2048+129% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 5.648 TFLOPS+89% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+21% | 1379 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 56 | 128+129% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+17% | 768 KB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| 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 GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design has 8 GB. The GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 256 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design) — a 100% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design) — the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 256 GB/s+100% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 2 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+27% | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6+2% | 4.5 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 4.0 (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP6. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC 4.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | PureVideo HD VP6 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design's 115W — a 42.1% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-35% | 115W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-40% | 500W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+23% | 85.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 50% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 65.6 (GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 59.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-50% | $150 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+60% | 65.6 |
| Codename | TU117 | GP104 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | June 27 2017 |
| Ranking | #323 | #358 |
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 GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design
