GeForce GTX 1650 vs Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
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 Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 43.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake).
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+43.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-43.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | Xe LPG (2023) (5nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| 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 $100 for the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake), it costs 25% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 90.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+90.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
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 Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
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.
Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
The Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in December 14 2023. It features the Xe LPG architecture. The core clock ranges from 300 MHz to 1950 MHz. It has 4 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 15W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,500 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)'s 5,500 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 43.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) uses Xe LPG, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1950 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+43% | 5,500 |
| Architecture | Turing | Xe LPG |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+22300% | 4 |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 1950 MHz+17% |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB+17% | 768 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs System.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | Shared |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | System |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | System |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Xe Media Engine (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Xe Media Engine. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | Xe Media Engine |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | Xe Media Engine |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)'s 15W — a 133.3% difference. The Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 15W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 366.7+250% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) launched at $300 and now averages $100. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 25% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 55.0 (Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 90.7% better value. The Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake) |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-50% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-25% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+91% | 55.0 |
| Codename | TU117 | Meteor Lake iGPU |
| Release | April 23 2019 | December 14 2023 |
| Ranking | #323 | #496 |
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 Graphics 4-Core iGPU (Arrow Lake)
