GeForce GTX 670MX SLI vs GTX 1650 SUPER

Place in the ranking	213	460
Place by popularity	57	not in top-100
Power efficiency	18.21	4.56
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	TU116	N13E-GR
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	22 November 2019 (5 years ago)	1 October 2012 (12 years ago)

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	1280	1920
Core clock speed	1530 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1725 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	6,600 million	5080 Million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	138.0	no data
Floating-point processing power	4.416 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	80	no 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).

Laptop size	no data	large
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Length	229 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data
SLI options	-	+

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	GDDR6	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	2x 192 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	2800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	no data
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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	no data
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	-	+
VR Ready	+	no data
Multi Monitor	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11
Shader Model	6.5	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.45
+166%

GTX 670MX SLI 9.93

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 18225
+159%

GTX 670MX SLI 7042

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 64463
+174%

GTX 670MX SLI 23526

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	70 +2.9%	68 −2.9%
1440p	36 +200%	12−14 −200%
4K	23 +188%	8−9 −188%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	61 +221%	18−20 −221%
Cyberpunk 2077	63 +215%	20−22 −215%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +150%	30−35 −150%
Counter-Strike 2	48 +153%	18−20 −153%
Cyberpunk 2077	47 +135%	20−22 −135%
Forza Horizon 4	121 +203%	40−45 −203%
Forza Horizon 5	75 +200%	24−27 −200%
Metro Exodus	89 +230%	27−30 −230%
Red Dead Redemption 2	84 +223%	24−27 −223%
Valorant	115 +203%	35−40 −203%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +150%	30−35 −150%
Counter-Strike 2	39 +105%	18−20 −105%
Cyberpunk 2077	38 +90%	20−22 −90%
Dota 2	138 +283%	35−40 −283%
Far Cry 5	151 +268%	40−45 −268%
Fortnite	130−140 +124%	55−60 −124%
Forza Horizon 4	101 +153%	40−45 −153%
Forza Horizon 5	75 +200%	24−27 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	103 +194%	35−40 −194%
Metro Exodus	61 +126%	27−30 −126%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +112%	75−80 −112%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30 +15.4%	24−27 −15.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	85−90 +190%	30−33 −190%
Valorant	100−110 +179%	35−40 −179%
World of Tanks	260−270 +56.5%	168 −56.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	80−85 +150%	30−35 −150%
Counter-Strike 2	35 +84.2%	18−20 −84.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	32 +60%	20−22 −60%
Dota 2	191 +431%	35−40 −431%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +92.7%	40−45 −92.7%
Forza Horizon 4	83 +108%	40−45 −108%
Forza Horizon 5	51 +104%	24−27 −104%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	160−170 +112%	75−80 −112%
Valorant	100−110 +179%	35−40 −179%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	45 +246%	12−14 −246%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +246%	12−14 −246%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +272%	45−50 −272%
Red Dead Redemption 2	11 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
World of Tanks	170−180 +145%	70−75 −145%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55 +179%	18−20 −179%
Counter-Strike 2	20 +150%	8−9 −150%
Cyberpunk 2077	19 +138%	8−9 −138%
Far Cry 5	75−80 +276%	21−24 −276%
Forza Horizon 4	60 +173%	21−24 −173%
Forza Horizon 5	54 +260%	14−16 −260%
Metro Exodus	55 +189%	18−20 −189%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45 +208%	12−14 −208%
Valorant	70−75 +188%	24−27 −188%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10 −40%	14−16 +40%
Dota 2	45 +125%	20−22 −125%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +125%	20−22 −125%
Metro Exodus	16 +220%	5−6 −220%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +179%	27−30 −179%
Red Dead Redemption 2	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45 +125%	20−22 −125%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +211%	9−10 −211%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Dota 2	80 +300%	20−22 −300%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +192%	12−14 −192%
Fortnite	30−35 +230%	10−11 −230%
Forza Horizon 4	30 +131%	12−14 −131%
Forza Horizon 5	39 +457%	7−8 −457%
Valorant	35−40 +250%	10−11 −250%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and GTX 670MX SLI compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 SUPER is 3% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 SUPER is 200% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 SUPER is 188% faster in 4K

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

in Forza Horizon 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 457% faster.
in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 670MX SLI is 40% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

GTX 1650 SUPER is ahead in 63 tests (98%)
GTX 670MX SLI is ahead in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	26.45	9.93
Recency	22 November 2019	1 October 2012
Chip lithography	12 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	150 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has a 166.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 670MX SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 670MX SLI is a notebook one.

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