GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 260

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 GTX 260

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

2717%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2610%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

2580%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2575%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2570%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

2555%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

2523%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2514%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2491%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

2484%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

2454%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2449%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

2404%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2403%

#278

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

2996%

#293

GeForce GTX 260

MSRP: $449|Avg: $449

100%

#294

Radeon HD 8490

MSRP: $99|Avg: $35

100%

#295

Radeon HD 8650D

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

99%

#297

Radeon HDG 4670

MSRP: $67|Avg: $15

95%

#298

Radeon HD 3870

MSRP: $219|Avg: $15

94%

#299

Radeon HD 4250

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

92%

#300

Radeon HD 6310

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

91%

#301

GeForce GTX 295

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

90%

#302

Radeon HD 4870 X2

MSRP: $550|Avg: $550

89%

#303

Radeon HD 3850 X2

MSRP: $349|Avg: $349

88%

#305

Radeon HD 4290

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

88%

#306

Radeon HD 5450

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

85%

#308

Radeon HD 3850

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2008). 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 260 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 555.8% higher G3D Mark score and 357.1% more VRAM (4 GB vs 896 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 260.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+555.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-555.8%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+357.1%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	Standard Size (267mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $449 for the GeForce GTX 260, it costs 83% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 3825.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+3825.8%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($449)

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 GTX 260 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GTX 260

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 260

The GeForce GTX 260 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 182W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,200 points. Launch price was $449.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX 260's 1,200 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 555.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 260 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 65 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 192 (GeForce GTX 260). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.4769 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 260).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
G3D Mark Score	7,869+556%	1,200
Architecture	Turing	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	65 nm
Shading Units	896+367%	192
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+526%	0.4769 TFLOPS
ROPs	32+14%	28
TMUs	56	64+14%
L2 Cache	1 MB+355%	0.22 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
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 260 has 896 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 357.1% 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 0.22 MB (GeForce GTX 260) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+357%	0.875 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+355%	0.22 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10_0 (GeForce GTX 260). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
DirectX	12+20%	10_0
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 260). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC 1st Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264 (GeForce GTX 260).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 1st Gen
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	NVDEC 1st Gen
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 260's 182W — a 83.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (GeForce GTX 260). Power connectors: None vs 2x 6-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 260
TDP	75W-59%	182W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	2x 6-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+1489%	6.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce GTX 260 launched at $449 and now averages $449. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 83.3% less ($374 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.7 (GeForce GTX 260) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 3785.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2008).