GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE

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 970XM FORCE

#25

Radeon RX 7600M XT

MSRP: $329|Avg: $300

100%

#28

Radeon RX 6650M XT

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

95%

#80

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

243%

#82

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

220%

#83

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

220%

#87

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

200%

#88

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

198%

#90

GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#92

Radeon RX 550 (móvel)

MSRP: $79|Avg: $40

99%

#95

GeForce GT 555M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $35

97%

#97

GeForce GTX 760M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

97%

#100

GeForce 945M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $98

94%

#103

Radeon RX 460 (móvel)

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

93%

#105

GeForce GTX 680M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

92%

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 GTX 970XM FORCE 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 17.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+17.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-17.3%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	Standard Size (267mm)

💎 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 GTX 970XM FORCE Benchmark Check

League of Legends

No prediction data available

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE

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 970XM FORCE

The GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 7 2014. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 924 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 81W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,707 points. Launch price was $2,560.89.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE's 6,707 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 17.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,280 (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.657 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
G3D Mark Score	7,869+17%	6,707
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1280+43%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+12%	2.657 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+60%	1038 MHz
ROPs	32	48+50%
TMUs	56	80+43%
L1 Cache	896 KB+87%	480 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 120 GB/s (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) — a 6.7% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE) — the GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s+7%	120 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	192-bit+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 1st Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	1st Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE's 81W — a 7.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce GTX 970XM FORCE
TDP	75W-7%	81W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	1x 6-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-7%	75°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+27%	82.8