970 vs 1650 SUPER

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

Combined performance score

GTX 1650 SUPER
26.17
+5.1%

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 5% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking189198
Place by popularity5082
Value for money27.0522.79
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameTU116GM204
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date29 October 2019 (4 years old)19 September 2014 (9 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329
Current price$206 $105 (0.3x MSRP)
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 SUPER has 19% better value for money than GTX 970.

Technical specs

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 cores12801664
CUDA coresno data1664
Core clock speed1530 MHz1050 MHz
Boost clock speed1725 MHz1178 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million5,200 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt145 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data98 °C
Texture fill rate138.0109 billion/sec
Floating-point performanceno data3,920 gflops

Size and 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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mm10.5" (26.7 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)no data500 Watt
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin2x 6-pins
SLI optionsno data+

Memory

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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz7.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s224 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
HDMI++
HDCPno data+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC supportno data+
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Technologies

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

GameStreamno data+
GeForce ShadowPlayno data+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorksno data+
VR Ready+no data
Multi Monitor+no data

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA7.5+

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.17
+5.1%
GTX 970 24.89

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 5% in our combined 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%

GTX 1650 SUPER 10143
+5.2%
GTX 970 9645

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 5% 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%

GTX 1650 SUPER 64463
+52.5%
GTX 970 42263

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 53% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 1650 SUPER 18218
+13.6%
GTX 970 16033

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 14% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 1650 SUPER 12225
+2.3%
GTX 970 11954

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 2% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 1650 SUPER 68578
GTX 970 72819
+6.2%

970 outperforms 1650 SUPER by 6% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 1650 SUPER 55368
+106%
GTX 970 26878

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 106% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GTX 1650 SUPER 657142
+55.6%
GTX 970 422295

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 56% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 1650 SUPER 53879
+67%
GTX 970 32271

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 67% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 1650 SUPER 56481
+118%
GTX 970 25897

1650 SUPER outperforms 970 by 118% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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 HD72
−13.9%
82
+13.9%
1440p36
−50%
54
+50%
4K22
−72.7%
38
+72.7%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 63
+53.7%
40−45
−53.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+4.1%
45−50
−4.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 53
+20.5%
40−45
−20.5%
Battlefield 5 72
−12.5%
80−85
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+4.5%
65−70
−4.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+22%
40−45
−22%
Far Cry 5 93
+43.1%
65−70
−43.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 89
+34.8%
65−70
−34.8%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+4.8%
80−85
−4.8%
Hitman 3 105
+40%
75−80
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 74
+39.6%
50−55
−39.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 71
+77.5%
40−45
−77.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85
+54.5%
55−60
−54.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 71
+47.9%
45−50
−47.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+4.1%
45−50
−4.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
−69.2%
40−45
+69.2%
Battlefield 5 58
−39.7%
80−85
+39.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 65−70
+4.5%
65−70
−4.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
−2.5%
40−45
+2.5%
Far Cry 5 86
+32.3%
65−70
−32.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 83
+25.8%
65−70
−25.8%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+4.8%
80−85
−4.8%
Hitman 3 83
+10.7%
75−80
−10.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 58
+9.4%
50−55
−9.4%
Metro Exodus 51
+30.8%
39
−30.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30
−33.3%
40−45
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 67
+21.8%
55−60
−21.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+11.1%
81
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 61
+27.1%
45−50
−27.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+4.1%
45−50
−4.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
−193%
40−45
+193%
Battlefield 5 57
+18.8%
48
−18.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
−20.6%
40−45
+20.6%
Far Cry 5 79
+21.5%
65−70
−21.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 76
+15.2%
65−70
−15.2%
Forza Horizon 4 85−90
+4.8%
80−85
−4.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+16.3%
43
−16.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
−129%
45−50
+129%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40−45
+7.9%
35−40
−7.9%
Hitman 3 51
+21.4%
40−45
−21.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 39
+18.2%
30−35
−18.2%
Metro Exodus 29
+20.8%
24
−20.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 11
−72.7%
18−20
+72.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40
+21.2%
30−35
−21.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+3.7%
27−30
−3.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
−92.3%
24−27
+92.3%
Battlefield 5 42
−33.3%
55−60
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 54
+25.6%
40−45
−25.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 55
+14.6%
45−50
−14.6%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+5.9%
50−55
−5.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14
−35.7%
18−20
+35.7%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+10.5%
18−20
−10.5%
Hitman 3 25
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5
−220%
16−18
+220%
Metro Exodus 16
+23.1%
13
−23.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 19
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+10.3%
29
−10.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
−180%
14−16
+180%
Battlefield 5 24
+20%
20
−20%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−100%
6−7
+100%
Far Cry 5 24
+14.3%
21−24
−14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 28
+16.7%
24−27
−16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
−37.5%
10−12
+37.5%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and GTX 970 compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 970 is 13.9% faster than GTX 1650 SUPER

1440p resolution:

  • GTX 970 is 50% faster than GTX 1650 SUPER

4K resolution:

  • GTX 970 is 72.7% faster than GTX 1650 SUPER

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 77.5% faster than the GTX 970.
  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 970 is 220% faster than the GTX 1650 SUPER.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is ahead in 52 tests (76%)
  • GTX 970 is ahead in 16 tests (24%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 26.17 24.89
Recency 29 October 2019 19 September 2014
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 145 Watt

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and GeForce GTX 970. The differences in performance seem too small.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
GeForce GTX 970

Similar GPU comparisons

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

User ratings: view and submit

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


4.1 4064 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 4145 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.