Rubin Ultra GPU vs GeForce GTX 1650
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 329 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | 3 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 23.36 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 19.48 | no data |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Rubin Ultra (2027) |
| GPU code name | TU117 | GR110 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 23 April 2019 (7 years ago) | 2027 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 896 | 57344 |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz | 2267 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4,700 million | 670,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 3600 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 93.24 | 4,062.5 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.984 TFLOPS | 260 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 24 |
| TMUs | 56 | 1792 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 1792 |
| L1 Cache | 896 KB | 112 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1024 KB | 128 MB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 6.0 x16 |
| Length | 229 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | SXM Module |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | HBM4e |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1024 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 32768 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 1900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 31.1 TB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | N/A |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | N/A |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | N/A |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 7.5 | 10.7 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1024 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 75 Watt | 3600 Watt |
GTX 1650 has 4700% lower power consumption.
Rubin Ultra GPU, on the other hand, has a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 and Rubin Ultra GPU. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop graphics card while Rubin Ultra GPU is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
