
RTX A1000
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
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 RTX A1000
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RTX A1000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 6.2% 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 SUPER.
| Insight | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+6.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-6.2%) |
| Longevity | 🔮Strong Longevity (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | 🎮 High Capacity (8 GB) | 🎮 High Capacity (4 GB) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $81 versus $500 for the RTX A1000, it costs 84% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 481.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+481.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) | ✅More affordable ($81) |
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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of RTX A1000 and GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

RTX A1000
The RTX A1000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 16 2024. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 727 MHz to 1462 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 18 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,814 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 22 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1530 MHz to 1725 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,186 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RTX A1000 scores 10,814 versus the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER's 10,186 — the RTX A1000 leads by 6.2%. The RTX A1000 is built on Ampere while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER uses Turing, both on 8 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (RTX A1000) vs 1,280 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Raw compute: 6.737 TFLOPS (RTX A1000) vs 4.416 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Boost clocks: 1462 MHz vs 1725 MHz.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,814+6% | 10,186 |
| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2304+80% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.737 TFLOPS+53% | 4.416 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1462 MHz | 1725 MHz+18% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 72 | 80+11% |
| L1 Cache | 2.3 MB+77% | 1.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RTX A1000 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 4 GB. The RTX A1000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (RTX A1000) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the RTX A1000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.2 (RTX A1000) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.2 | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A1000) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Decoder: 5th Gen NVDEC vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A1000) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER).
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 7th Gen NVENC | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | 5th Gen NVDEC | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The RTX A1000 draws 50W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER's 100W — a 66.7% difference. The RTX A1000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (RTX A1000) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 163mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-50% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 163mm | 229mm |
| Height | 69mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 216.3+112% | 101.9 |
Value Analysis
The RTX A1000 launched at $749 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER launched at $159 and now averages $81. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER costs 83.8% less ($419 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 21.6 (RTX A1000) vs 125.8 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER offers 482.4% better value. The RTX A1000 is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2019).
| Feature | RTX A1000 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $749 | $159-79% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $500 | $81-84% |
| Performance per Dollar | 21.6 | 125.8+482% |
| Codename | GA107 | TU116 |
| Release | April 16 2024 | November 22 2019 |
| Ranking | #251 | #258 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.












