GeForce GTX 1650 vs GT 755M SLI

Place in the ranking	490	266
Place by popularity	not in top-100	3
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	39.19
Power efficiency	6.05	18.91
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	N14P-?	TU117
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	1 November 2013 (11 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	768	896
Core clock speed	980 MHz	1485 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1665 MHz
Number of transistors	2x 1300 Million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	2x ~50 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	93.24
Floating-point processing power	no data	2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	56

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2x 2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	2x 128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5400 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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	no data	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.5
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark 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 755M SLI 8.70

GTX 1650 20.40
+134%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one 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 by Time Spy.

GT 755M SLI 5673

GTX 1650 13645
+141%

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.

GT 755M SLI 20627

GTX 1650 44694
+117%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 755M SLI 4106

GTX 1650 9203
+124%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 755M SLI 28792

GTX 1650 50549
+75.6%

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:

Full HD	37 −86.5%	69 +86.5%
1440p	14−16 −164%	37 +164%
4K	9−10 −156%	23 +156%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	2.16
1440p	no data	4.03
4K	no data	6.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

−129%

30−35
+129%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −152%	53 +152%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −292%	47 +292%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −204%	79 +204%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −189%	52 +189%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −129%	30−35 +129%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −220%	64 +220%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −233%	80 +233%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −295%	229 +295%
Hitman 3	16−18 −188%	49 +188%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −496%	292 +496%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −288%	101 +288%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −221%	77 +221%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −297%	115 +297%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −280%	224 +280%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −295%	83 +295%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −192%	35 +192%
Battlefield 5	24−27 −177%	72 +177%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 −156%	46 +156%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −129%	30−35 +129%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −160%	52 +160%
Far Cry New Dawn	24−27 −133%	56 +133%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −247%	201 +247%
Hitman 3	16−18 −176%	47 +176%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −431%	260 +431%
Metro Exodus	24−27 −173%	71 +173%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 −129%	55 +129%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −155%	74 +155%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −91.7%	45−50 +91.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −249%	206 +249%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 −19%	25 +19%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 −8.3%	13 +8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20 +125%	8 −125%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 −129%	30−35 +129%
Far Cry 5	20−22 −95%	39 +95%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 −12.1%	65 +12.1%
Hitman 3	16−18 −141%	41 +141%
Horizon Zero Dawn	45−50 −22.4%	60 +22.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30 −114%	62 +114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 −75%	42 +75%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +181%	21 −181%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

−125%

54
+125%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 −147%	42 +147%
Far Cry New Dawn	12−14 −177%	36 +177%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 −125%	18 +125%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −225%	13 +225%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −156%	21−24 +156%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −200%	12−14 +200%
Far Cry 5	10−11 −140%	24 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 −239%	122 +239%
Hitman 3	12−14 −125%	27 +125%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −139%	43 +139%
Metro Exodus	10−12 −273%	41 +273%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 −400%	45 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −200%	24−27 +200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 −164%	145 +164%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

−133%

35
+133%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 −150%	20 +150%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −183%	17 +183%
Hitman 3	5−6 −160%	13 +160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 −20.6%	41 +20.6%
Metro Exodus	6−7 −350%	27 +350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −333%	26 +333%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −160%	13 +160%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 −25%	5 +25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −175%	10−12 +175%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −140%	12 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −200%	30 +200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −550%	26 +550%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 −167%	8 +167%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

8−9

−113%

17
+113%

This is how GT 755M SLI and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 is 86% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 is 164% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 is 156% faster in 4K

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 755M SLI is 181% faster.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 is 550% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GT 755M SLI is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
GTX 1650 is ahead in 70 tests (97%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.70	20.40
Recency	1 November 2013	23 April 2019
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	2 Watt	75 Watt

GT 755M SLI has 3650% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 134.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 755M SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.