Tesla T4 vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Tesla T4
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 Tesla T4
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Tesla T4 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | 🎮 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 $1,000 for the Tesla T4, it costs 92% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 1138.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1138.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,000) | ✅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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla T4 and GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Tesla T4
The Tesla T4 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 13 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 585 MHz to 1590 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 70W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 10,153 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
The Tesla T4 scores 10,153 and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER reaches 10,186 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Tesla T4 is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 2,560 (Tesla T4) vs 1,280 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Raw compute: 8.141 TFLOPS (Tesla T4) vs 4.416 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Boost clocks: 1590 MHz vs 1725 MHz.
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 10,153 | 10,186 |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+100% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 8.141 TFLOPS+84% | 4.416 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1590 MHz | 1725 MHz+8% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 160+100% | 80 |
| L1 Cache | 2.5 MB+92% | 1.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla T4 | 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 | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Tesla T4 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER has 4 GB. The Tesla T4 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (Tesla T4) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the Tesla T4 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Tesla T4) vs 12.1 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (Tesla T4) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Decoder: NVDEC (Turing) vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8,VP9 (Tesla T4) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER).
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Turing) | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | NVDEC (Turing) | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,MPEG-2,VC-1,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla T4 draws 70W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER's 100W — a 35.3% difference. The Tesla T4 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (Tesla T4) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 168mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 76°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 70W-30% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 168mm | 229mm |
| Height | 69mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 76°C | 75°C-1% |
| Perf/Watt | 145.0+42% | 101.9 |
Value Analysis
The Tesla T4 launched at $1880 MSRP and currently averages $1000, while the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER launched at $159 and now averages $81. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER costs 91.9% less ($919 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 10.2 (Tesla T4) vs 125.8 (GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER) — the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER offers 1133.3% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2018).
| Feature | Tesla T4 | GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1880 | $159-92% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $1000 | $81-92% |
| Performance per Dollar | 10.2 | 125.8+1133% |
| Codename | TU104 | TU116 |
| Release | September 13 2018 | November 22 2019 |
| Ranking | #260 | #258 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla T4 and GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
