GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 295

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 295

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

3023%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2904%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

2870%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2865%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2859%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

2843%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

2807%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2797%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2771%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

2763%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

2730%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

2724%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

2675%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

2673%

#286

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

3333%

#301

GeForce GTX 295

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

100%

#302

Radeon HD 4870 X2

MSRP: $550|Avg: $550

99%

#303

Radeon HD 3850 X2

MSRP: $349|Avg: $349

98%

#305

Radeon HD 4290

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

98%

#306

Radeon HD 5450

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

95%

#308

Radeon HD 3850

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

93%

#309

Radeon HD 4200

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

93%

#311

Radeon HD 4270

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

92%

#312

Radeon E6460

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

90%

#313

Radeon HD 6290

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

88%

#314

GeForce GTX 280

MSRP: $649|Avg: $649

83%

#315

Radeon HD 3470

MSRP: $60|Avg: $15

81%

#316

Radeon HD 3000

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

80%

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 2009). 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 295 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 556.8% higher G3D Mark score and 128.6% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 295.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+556.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-556.8%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+128.6%)	❌ 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. Although it costs $75 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 337.9% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 295.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+337.9%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($50)

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 295 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GTX 295

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 295

The GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 8 2009. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 480 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 289W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,198 points. Launch price was $500.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX 295's 1,198 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 556.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 295 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 480 (GeForce GTX 295). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 295).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
G3D Mark Score	7,869+557%	1,198
Architecture	Turing	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	896+87%	480 ×2
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+401%	0.5962 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs	32+14%	28 ×2
TMUs	56	80 ×2+43%
L2 Cache	1 MB+355%	0.22 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
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 295 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 128.6% 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 295) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+129%	1.75 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 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 295). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
DirectX	12+8%	11.1 (10_0)
OpenGL	4.6+39%	3.3
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 295). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 295).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	PureVideo HD VP2
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 295's 289W — a 117.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 680W (GeForce GTX 295). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 95°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 295
TDP	75W-74%	289W
Recommended PSU	300W-56%	680W
Power Connector	None	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-26%	95°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+2459%	4.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce GTX 295 launched at $499 and now averages $50. The GeForce GTX 295 costs 33.3% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 24.0 (GeForce GTX 295) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 337.1% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2009).