GeForce GTX 1650 vs Riva 128
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 331 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 4 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 22.56 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 19.48 |
| Architecture | no data | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | NV3 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 April 1997 (29 years ago) | 23 April 2019 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $149 |
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 | no data | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 100 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1665 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 4 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 350 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 0.1 | 93.24 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 1 | 32 |
| TMUs | 1 | 56 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 1024 KB |
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 | AGP 2x | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 229 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
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 | SDR | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 MB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 100 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 1.6 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
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 VGA, 1x DB13W3 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 5.0 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 1.0 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 1997 | 23 April 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 350 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 4 Watt | 75 Watt |
Riva 128 has 1775% lower power consumption.
GTX 1650, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 22 years, a 102300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2817% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Riva 128 and GeForce GTX 1650. 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.
