CMP 30HX vs GeForce GTX 1650

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 with CMP 30HX, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
20.40

CMP 30HX outperforms GTX 1650 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking264255
Place by popularity3not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.5121.47
Power efficiency18.8411.68
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU117TU116
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)25 February 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 has 84% better value for money than CMP 30HX.

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 cores8961408
Core clock speed1485 MHz1530 MHz
Boost clock speed1665 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt125 Watt
Texture fill rate93.24157.1
Floating-point processing power2.984 TFLOPS5.027 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs5688

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x4
Length229 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s336.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2
CUDA7.57.5

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 20.40
CMP 30HX 21.08
+3.3%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

GTX 1650 7873
CMP 30HX 8135
+3.3%

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.

GTX 1650 39233
CMP 30HX 68128
+73.6%

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 HD67
+3.1%
65−70
−3.1%
1440p37
+5.7%
35−40
−5.7%
4K24
+0%
24−27
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.2212.29
1440p4.0322.83
4K6.2133.29

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
+6%
50−55
−6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
+4.4%
45−50
−4.4%
Battlefield 5 79
−1.3%
80−85
+1.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 52
+4%
50−55
−4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 64
−1.6%
65−70
+1.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 80
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 229
−0.4%
230−240
+0.4%
Hitman 3 49
−2%
50−55
+2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 292
−2.7%
300−310
+2.7%
Metro Exodus 101
+1%
100−105
−1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 77
+2.7%
75−80
−2.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 115
+4.5%
110−120
−4.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 224
−2.7%
230−240
+2.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 83
−2.4%
85−90
+2.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
+0%
35−40
+0%
Battlefield 5 72
+2.9%
70−75
−2.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 46
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 52
+4%
50−55
−4%
Far Cry New Dawn 56
+1.8%
55−60
−1.8%
Forza Horizon 4 201
+0.5%
200−210
−0.5%
Hitman 3 47
+4.4%
45−50
−4.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn 260
+0%
260−270
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+1.4%
70−75
−1.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55
+0%
55−60
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 74
−1.4%
75−80
+1.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+2.2%
45−50
−2.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 206
−1.9%
210−220
+1.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+6.7%
30−33
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 39
−2.6%
40−45
+2.6%
Forza Horizon 4 65
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hitman 3 41
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+0%
60−65
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 62
+3.3%
60−65
−3.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
+5%
40−45
−5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 54
−1.9%
55−60
+1.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 42
+5%
40−45
−5%
Far Cry New Dawn 36
+2.9%
35−40
−2.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+9.5%
21−24
−9.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 24
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 122
+1.7%
120−130
−1.7%
Hitman 3 27
+0%
27−30
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 43
+7.5%
40−45
−7.5%
Metro Exodus 41
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 145
+3.6%
140−150
−3.6%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20
+11.1%
18−20
−11.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 17
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%
Hitman 3 13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+2.5%
40−45
−2.5%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 13
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30−33
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+6.3%
16−18
−6.3%

This is how GTX 1650 and CMP 30HX compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 3% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 6% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.40 21.08
Recency 23 April 2019 25 February 2021
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 125 Watt

GTX 1650 has 66.7% lower power consumption.

CMP 30HX, on the other hand, has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1650 and CMP 30HX.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while CMP 30HX is a workstation one.


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

Vote for your favorite

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
GeForce GTX 1650
NVIDIA CMP 30HX
CMP 30HX

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


3.8 23134 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 27 votes

Rate CMP 30HX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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