GeForce GTX 1650 vs Titan X Pascal

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

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 Titan X Pascal lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Titan X Pascal is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 73.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (8 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 X Pascal
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-73.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+73.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
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 $200 for the Titan X Pascal, it costs 63% less. While it maintains lower overall performance, this results in a 53.6% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+53.6%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200)

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

Titan X Pascal Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Titan X Pascal

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 X Pascal

The Titan X Pascal is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 2 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1417 MHz to 1531 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 13,660 points. Launch price was $1,199.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Titan X Pascal's 13,660 — the Titan X Pascal leads by 73.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Titan X Pascal uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3,584 (Titan X Pascal). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.97 TFLOPS (Titan X Pascal). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1531 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
G3D Mark Score	7,869	13,660+74%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	896	3584+300%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	10.97 TFLOPS+268%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+9%	1531 MHz
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	56	224+300%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	1.3 MB+48%
L2 Cache	1 MB	3 MB+200%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
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 X Pascal has 8 GB. The Titan X Pascal offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 480 GB/s (Titan X Pascal) — a 275% advantage for the Titan X Pascal. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3 MB (Titan X Pascal) — the Titan X Pascal has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5X
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	480 GB/s+275%
Bus Width	128-bit	384-bit+200%
L2 Cache	1 MB	3 MB+200%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Titan X Pascal). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6+2%	4.5
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 5.0 (2x) (Titan X Pascal). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP8. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Titan X Pascal).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Titan X Pascal
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 5.0 (2x)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP8
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Titan X Pascal's 250W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 600W (Titan X Pascal). Power connectors: None vs 6-pin + 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 X Pascal
TDP	75W-70%	250W
Recommended PSU	300W-50%	600W
Power Connector	None	6-pin + 8-pin
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	112mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+92%	54.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Titan X Pascal launched at $1199 and now averages $200. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 62.5% less ($125 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 68.3 (Titan X Pascal) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 53.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).