
GeForce GTX 1650 vs TITAN V

GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

TITAN V
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
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 TITAN V lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The TITAN V is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 155.1% higher G3D Mark score and 200% more VRAM (12 GB vs 4 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-155.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+155.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Volta) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+200%) |
| 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 $1,045 for the TITAN V, it costs 93% less. While it maintains significantly lower raw performance, this results in a 446.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+446.1%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($75) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,045) |
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 TITAN V

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.

TITAN V
The TITAN V is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 7 2017. It features the Volta architecture. The core clock ranges from 1200 MHz to 1455 MHz. It has 5120 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 20,077 points. Launch price was $2,999.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the TITAN V's 20,077 — the TITAN V leads by 155.1%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the TITAN V uses Volta, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5,120 (TITAN V). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 14.9 TFLOPS (TITAN V). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1455 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 20,077+155% |
| Architecture | Turing | Volta |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 5120+471% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 14.9 TFLOPS+399% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+14% | 1455 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 96+200% |
| TMUs | 56 | 320+471% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 7.5 MB+752% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4.5 MB+350% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TITAN V has 12 GB. The TITAN V offers 200% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 653 GB/s (TITAN V) — a 410.2% advantage for the TITAN V. Bus width: 128-bit vs 3072-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.5 MB (TITAN V) — the TITAN V has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 12 GB+200% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 653 GB/s+410% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 3072-bit+2300% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4.5 MB+350% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (TITAN V). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 6.0 (TITAN V). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP9. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (TITAN V).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC 6.0 |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | PureVideo HD VP9 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the TITAN V's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 600W (TITAN V). Power connectors: None vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-70% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-50% | 600W |
| Power Connector | None | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 229mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 112mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+31% | 80.3 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the TITAN V launched at $2999 and now averages $1045. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 92.8% less ($970 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 19.2 (TITAN V) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 446.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | TITAN V |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-95% | $2999 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $75-93% | $1045 |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.9+446% | 19.2 |
| Codename | TU117 | GV100 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | December 7 2017 |
| Ranking | #323 | #109 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.











