Titan X Pascal vs GeForce GTX 1650
Titan X Pascal
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650
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 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 | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+73.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-73.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 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 | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+53.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($75) |
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 Titan X Pascal and GeForce GTX 1650
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.
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 Performance
In G3D Mark, the Titan X Pascal scores 13,660 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the Titan X Pascal leads by 73.6%. The Titan X Pascal is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 16 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 3,584 (Titan X Pascal) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 10.97 TFLOPS (Titan X Pascal) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1531 MHz vs 1665 MHz.
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 13,660+74% | 7,869 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 3584+300% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 10.97 TFLOPS+268% | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1531 MHz | 1665 MHz+9% |
| ROPs | 96+200% | 32 |
| TMUs | 224+300% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 1.3 MB+48% | 0.88 MB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+200% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Titan X Pascal comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The Titan X Pascal offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 480 GB/s (Titan X Pascal) vs 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) — a 275% advantage for the Titan X Pascal. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Titan X Pascal) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the Titan X Pascal has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 480 GB/s+275% | 128 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 384-bit+200% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+200% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.1 (Titan X Pascal) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12 |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.4+27% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 4+33% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5.0 (2x) (Titan X Pascal) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP8 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Titan X Pascal) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5.0 (2x) | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP8 | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Titan X Pascal draws 250W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 107.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 600W (Titan X Pascal) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs None. Card length: 267mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 75W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 600W | 300W-50% |
| Power Connector | 6-pin + 8-pin | None |
| Length | 267mm | 229mm |
| Height | 112mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 54.6 | 104.9+92% |
Value Analysis
The Titan X Pascal launched at $1199 MSRP and currently averages $200, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 62.5% less ($125 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 68.3 (Titan X Pascal) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 53.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | Titan X Pascal | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1199 | $149-88% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $75-63% |
| Performance per Dollar | 68.3 | 104.9+54% |
| Codename | GP102 | TU117 |
| Release | August 2 2016 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #198 | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Titan X Pascal and GeForce GTX 1650
