Xe Arctic Sound vs GeForce GTX 1650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking333not rated
Place by popularity4not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation22.52no data
Power efficiency19.48no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Generation 12.5 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameTU117Arctic Sound
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 April 2019 (7 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores8964096
Core clock speed1485 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speed1665 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,700 million8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt500 Watt
Texture fill rate93.24230.4
Floating-point processing power2.984 TFLOPS7.373 TFLOPS
ROPs32128
TMUs56256
L1 Cache896 KBno data
L2 Cache1024 KBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length229 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5HBM2e
Maximum RAM amount4 GB32 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit4096 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2.4 GB/s
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s1,229 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA7.5-

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 500 Watt

GTX 1650 has 567% lower power consumption.

Xe Arctic Sound, on the other hand, has a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 and Xe Arctic Sound. We've got no test results to judge.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 28534 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xe Arctic Sound on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1650 or Xe Arctic Sound, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.