GeForce GTX 1650
VS
GeForce MX230

GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce MX230

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce MX230

2019Core: 1519 MHzBoost: 1582 MHz

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.

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 MX230

#328
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
892%
#330
809%
#331
807%
#335
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
733%
#336
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
728%
#338
GeForce MX230
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
100%
#340
RADEON HD6410D
MSRP: $35|Avg: $5
99%
#341
GeForce 820M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30
99%
#342
Radeon R7 M465X
MSRP: $150|Avg: $45
98%
#344
GeForce 830A
MSRP: $100|Avg: $30
96%
#348
GeForce MX350
MSRP: $250|Avg: $200
93%
#349
GeForce 840A
MSRP: $100|Avg: $25
92%
#350
HD Graphics 630
MSRP: $100|Avg: $30
91%
#351
Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
MSRP: $450|Avg: $450
91%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 330.9% higher G3D Mark score and 100% 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 MX230.

InsightGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
Performance
Leading raw performance (+330.9%)
Lower raw frame rates (-330.9%)
Longevity
Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
Ecosystem
Supports FSR Upscaling
Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM
✅ More VRAM (+100%)
❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency
⚡ Higher Power Consumption
💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
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 MX230, it costs 50% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 761.9% higher cost efficiency score.

InsightGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
Cost Efficiency
Better overall value (+761.9%)
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 MX230

NVIDIA

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.

NVIDIA

GeForce MX230

The GeForce MX230 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1519 MHz to 1582 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,826 points.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce MX230's 1,826 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 330.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce MX230 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 256 (GeForce MX230). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.81 TFLOPS (GeForce MX230). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1582 MHz.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
G3D Mark Score
7,869+331%
1,826
Architecture
Turing
Pascal
Process Node
12 nm
14 nm
Shading Units
896+250%
256
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.984 TFLOPS+268%
0.81 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1665 MHz+5%
1582 MHz
ROPs
32+100%
16
TMUs
56+250%
16
L1 Cache
896 KB+833%
96 KB
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
0.5 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
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 MX230 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 48 GB/s (GeForce MX230) — a 166.7% advantage for the GeForce GTX 1650. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce MX230) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
VRAM Capacity
4 GB+100%
2 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
128 GB/s+167%
48 GB/s
Bus Width
128-bit+100%
64-bit
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
0.5 MB
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce MX230's 10W — a 152.9% difference. The GeForce MX230 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce MX230). Power connectors: None vs Mobile.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
TDP
75W
10W-87%
Recommended PSU
300W-14%
350W
Power Connector
None
Mobile
Length
229mm
Height
111mm
Slots
2
Temp (Load)
70°C
Perf/Watt
104.9
182.6+74%
💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce MX230 launched at $150 and now averages $150. 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 12.2 (GeForce MX230) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 759.8% better value.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650GeForce MX230
MSRP
$149
$150
Avg Price (30d)
$75-50%
$150
Performance per Dollar
104.9+760%
12.2
Codename
TU117
GP108
Release
April 23 2019
February 21 2019
Ranking
#323
#708