GeForce GTX 1650 vs GT 330M

Place in performance ranking	1177	253
Place by popularity	not in top-100	2
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	18.96
Architecture	GT2xx (2009−2012)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	N11P-GE1	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	10 January 2010 (14 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149
Current price	$448	$185 (1.2x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 330M and GTX 1650 have a nearly equal value for money.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	48	896
CUDA cores	48	no data
Core clock speed	575 MHz	1485 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1665 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	9.200	93.24
Floating-point performance	121.44 gflops	no data
Gigaflops	182	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 330M and GeForce GTX 1650 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-A (3.0)	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	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	GDDR2, GDDR3, DDR3	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz	8000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	128.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only 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	HDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGADisplayPort	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.5
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 330M 0.55

GTX 1650 20.38
+3605%

GTX 1650 outperforms GT 330M by 3605% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GT 330M 214

GTX 1650 7879
+3582%

GTX 1650 outperforms GT 330M by 3582% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GT 330M 2658

GTX 1650 44694
+1582%

GTX 1650 outperforms GT 330M by 1582% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p	10 −3400%	350−400 +3400%
Full HD	16 −331%	69 +331%
1440p	0−1	37
4K	0−1	24

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−967%

30−35
+967%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −2500%	52 +2500%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −967%	30−35 +967%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −1500%	64 +1500%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −2900%	90 +2900%
Hitman 3	3−4 −2433%	76 +2433%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −945%	115 +945%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −1075%	94 +1075%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −3050%	63 +3050%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −967%	30−35 +967%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −2150%	90 +2150%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −2667%	83 +2667%
Hitman 3	3−4 −1167%	38 +1167%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −700%	88 +700%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −638%	59 +638%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −2367%	74 +2367%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −300%	8 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −967%	30−35 +967%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −875%	39 +875%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 −2067%	65 +2067%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 −445%	60 +445%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −1300%	42 +1300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −700%	32 +700%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1100%	12−14 +1100%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −3800%	39 +3800%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1333%	43 +1333%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −2200%	21−24 +2200%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5	4−5 −1575%	67 +1575%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −2200%	21−24 +2200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −2200%	23 +2200%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −425%	21 +425%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−750%

17
+750%

This is how GT 330M and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 is 3400% faster in 900p
GTX 1650 is 331% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Far Cry 5, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 is 3800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 1650 surpassed GT 330M in all 32 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.55	20.38
Recency	10 January 2010	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	75 Watt