Nvidia Geforce Gtx 1650 Vs 3050
GTX 1650 vs RTX 3050 Mobile
Toll now 212$
Games supported 85%
Price at present no data
Games supported 93%
General info
Comparison of graphics carte du jour architecture, market place segment, value for coin and other general parameters.
| Place in performance rating | 190 | 161 |
| Value for money | 35.xl | no data |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2021) | Ampere (2020−2022) |
| GPU code proper name | TU117 | GN20-P0 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 23 April 2019 (3 years agone) | 11 May 2021 (1 yr ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | no data |
| Electric current price | $212 (1.4x MSRP) | no data |
Value for money
To get the index we compare the characteristics of video cards and their relative prices.
no data
Technical specs
General operation parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base of operations clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise cess you take to consider their criterion and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 896 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz | 1238 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | four,700 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 8 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 75 Watt | threescore Watt (35 - lxxx Watt TGP) |
| Texture make full rate | 93.24 | 102.0 |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Data on GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a time to come computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards information technology's interface and double-decker (motherboard compatibility), additional ability connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video bill of fare is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | large |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 229 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
Memory
Parameters of memory installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Note that GPUs integrated into processors accept no dedicated VRAM and apply a shared part of system RAM.
| Retentivity blazon | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | four GB | 4 GB |
| Retentivity coach width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 12000 MHz |
| Retentivity bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 224.0 GB/due south |
| Shared retention | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
Types and number of video connectors nowadays on the reviewed GPUs. Equally a rule, data in this department is precise simply for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | no data |
API support
APIs supported, including particular versions of those APIs.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.v | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.half-dozen | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | i.2.131 | 1.2 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 8.6 |
Criterion functioning
Not-gaming benchmark performance comparing. Note that overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range.
Overall score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, experience gratuitous to speak up in comments section, nosotros ordinarily fix issues speedily.
- Passmark
- 3DMark Vantage Performance
- 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
- 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
- 3DMark Fire Strike Score
- 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
- 3DMark Ice Storm GPU
This is probably the most ubiquitous benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics carte du jour a thorough evaluation nether various load, providing four dissever benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, eleven and 12 (the last being washed in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics bill of fare with two scenes, 1 depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cavern, the other displaying a infinite fleet attack on a caught planet. Information technology was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is at present recommended to exist used instead.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
3DMark xi is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on 2 scenes, i being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded past Time Spy.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX eleven feature level ten benchmark that was used for domicile PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. But like Water ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Dark Raid.
Benchmark coverage: xiv%
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 criterion for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature seemingly made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic enough graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Criterion coverage: 14%
Ice Tempest Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, function of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure out entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX eleven characteristic level nine to display a battle between two space fleets almost a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
Criterion coverage: 8%
Gaming operation
Let's come across how skilful the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Total Hard disk | 70 | 72 |
| 1440p | 39 | 44 |
| 4K | 23 | 28 |
- Total HD
Depression Preset - Total HD
Medium Preset - Full HD
High Preset - Total Hard disk drive
Ultra Preset - 1440p
High Preset - 1440p
Ultra Preset - 4KLoftier Preset
- 4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassinator's Creed Odyssey | 53 +71% | 30−35 −71% |
| Assassin'southward Creed Valhalla | 47 −23.4% | 58 +23.iv% |
| Battlefield 5 | 61 −52.v% | 93 +52.5% |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 76 +145% | 30−35 −145% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 −80.viii% | 47 +lxxx.8% |
| Far Weep 5 | 68 −23.5% | 84 +23.5% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 66 −25.viii% | 83 +25.8% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 90 +190% | 30−35 −190% |
| Hitman 3 | 76 −34.2% | 102 +34.2% |
| Horizon Nothing Dawn | 55 −36.4% | 75 +36.4% |
| Red Expressionless Redemption 2 | 52 +67.7% | xxx−35 −67.seven% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 58 −29.3% | 75 +29.three% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 56 −17.9% | 66 +17.ix% |
| Assassin'due south Creed Odyssey | 47 +51.6% | 30−35 −51.6% |
| Assassin'south Creed Valhalla | 35 +ix.4% | 32 −ix.4% |
| Battleground 5 | 53 −67.9% | 89 +67.nine% |
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 58 +87.1% | xxx−35 −87.1% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 −42.three% | 37 +42.3% |
| Far Cry 5 | 62 −27.4% | 79 +27.4% |
| Far Weep New Dawn | 62 −24.2% | 77 +24.ii% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 83 +168% | 30−35 −168% |
| Hitman 3 | 62 −14.5% | 71 +xiv.five% |
| Horizon Nothing Dawn | 41 −43.9% | 59 +43.9% |
| Metro Exodus | 35 −40% | 49 +40% |
| Blood-red Dead Redemption 2 | 28 −10.vii% | 30−35 +10.7% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 47 −36.two% | 64 +36.2% |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 74 −14.9% | 85 +14.9% |
| Lookout man Dogs: Legion | 48 −18.8% | 57 +18.eight% |
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 25 −24% | 30−35 +24% |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 13 −84.6% | 24 +84.6% |
| Battleground 5 | 51 −62.7% | 83 +62.7% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 −19.2% | 31 +xix.ii% |
| Far Cry 5 | 58 −27.6% | 74 +27.6% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 57 −15.8% | 66 +15.8% |
| Forza Horizon four | 65 +110% | 30−35 −110% |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 42 −xiv.3% | 48 +14.3% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 21 −23.8% | 26 +23.8% |
| Telephone call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 36 +16.1% | thirty−35 −16.ane% |
| Hitman 3 | 37 −xviii.9% | 44 +18.9% |
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 26 −76.ix% | 46 +76.9% |
| Metro Exodus | twenty −45% | 29 +45% |
| Red Expressionless Redemption 2 | 17 −82.4% | thirty−35 +82.4% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 29 −44.eight% | 42 +44.8% |
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | eighteen −72.ii% | xxx−35 +72.2% |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 13 −69.2% | 22 +69.2% |
| Battleground 5 | 39 −69.2% | 66 +69.2% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 +23.eight% | 21 −23.8% |
| Far Cry 5 | 39 −33.3% | 52 +33.iii% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 41 −26.eight% | 52 +26.viii% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 46 +48.4% | 30−35 −48.4% |
| Spotter Dogs: Legion | 14 −35.7% | 19 +35.7% |
| Telephone call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 20 −55% | 30−35 +55% |
| Hitman 3 | nineteen −10.5% | 21 +10.v% |
| Horizon Cipher Dawn | xv −107% | 30−35 +107% |
| Metro Exodus | 12 −41.vii% | 17 +41.7% |
| Cherry-red Dead Redemption ii | 24−27 −nineteen.2% | thirty−35 +xix.ii% |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 13 −76.9% | 23 +76.nine% |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 26 −26.9% | 33 +26.9% |
| Assassinator's Creed Odyssey | 13 −138% | 30−35 +138% |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 5 −520% | 30−35 +520% |
| Battlefield v | 21 −66.7% | 35 +66.7% |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 −nineteen.2% | 30−35 +19.2% |
| Far Weep five | 19 +0% | 19 +0% |
| Far Cry New Dawn | 21 −47.6% | xxx−35 +47.6% |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30 −3.3% | 30−35 +3.3% |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | eight −288% | 30−35 +288% |
Advantages and disadvantages
| Functioning rating | 26.35 | xxx.76 |
| Novelty | 23 April 2019 | 11 May 2021 |
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 896 | 2048 |
| Memory bandwidth | 128 | 224 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 8 nm |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 75 Watt | threescore Watt |
Judging by the results of constructed and gaming tests, Technical City recommends
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile
since it shows improve operation.
Be enlightened that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile is a notebook one.
Should you still accept questions concerning option between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments department, and we shall respond.
Cast your vote
Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote past clicking "Like" button most your favorite graphics card.
Competitors of GeForce GTX 1650 by AMD
Nosotros believe that the nearest equivalent to GeForce GTX 1650 from AMD is Radeon RX 580X, which is nearly equal in speed and is lower by 1 position in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce GTX 1650:
Competitors of GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile past AMD
The nearest GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile'south AMD equivalent is Radeon RX 580 Mobile, which is faster past 2% and college by 8 positions in our rating.
Here are some closest AMD rivals to GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile:
Like GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance more than or less close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
User rating
Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, likewise every bit charge per unit them yourself.
Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 on a scale of i to five:
Charge per unit NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Mobile on a scale of i to 5:
Questions and comments
Here you can enquire a question about this comparison, hold or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.
Graphics settings
Screen resolution
FPS
Source: https://technical.city/en/video/GeForce-GTX-1650-vs-GeForce-RTX-3050-mobile
0 Response to "Nvidia Geforce Gtx 1650 Vs 3050"
Post a Comment