GeForce RTX 5080 vs GTX 1650

Place in the ranking	274	1
Place by popularity	3	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	37.42	44.78
Power efficiency	18.81	16.27
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code name	TU117	GB203
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	30 January 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149	$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 5080 has 20% better value for money than GTX 1650.

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	896	10752
Core clock speed	1485 MHz	2295 MHz
Boost clock speed	1665 MHz	2617 MHz
Number of transistors	4,700 million	45,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	360 Watt
Texture fill rate	93.24	879.3
Floating-point processing power	2.984 TFLOPS	56.28 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	128
TMUs	56	336
Tensor Cores	no data	336
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	84

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).

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 5.0 x16
Length	229 mm	304 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 16-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 type	GDDR5	GDDR7
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	1875 MHz
Memory bandwidth	128.0 GB/s	960.0 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI	+	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.5	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.4
CUDA	7.5	10.1

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 19.71

RTX 5080 100.00
+407%

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 7875

RTX 5080 40026
+408%

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	69 −407%	350−400 +407%
1440p	40 −400%	200−210 +400%
4K	23 −378%	110−120 +378%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	2.16 +32.2%	2.85 −32.2%
1440p	3.73 +34.1%	5.00 −34.1%
4K	6.48 +40.2%	9.08 −40.2%

GTX 1650 has 32% lower cost per frame in 1080p
GTX 1650 has 34% lower cost per frame in 1440p
GTX 1650 has 40% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −432%	190−200 +432%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 −388%	200−210 +388%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	66 −77.3%	110−120 +77.3%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −432%	190−200 +432%
Cyberpunk 2077	17 −400%	85−90 +400%
Forza Horizon 4	94 −379%	450−500 +379%
Forza Horizon 5	60 −290%	230−240 +290%
Metro Exodus	66 −150%	160−170 +150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	77 −103%	150−160 +103%
Valorant	85 −520%	500−550 +520%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75 −56%	110−120 +56%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −432%	190−200 +432%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 −400%	70−75 +400%
Dota 2	82 −112%	170−180 +112%
Far Cry 5	90 −81.1%	160−170 +81.1%
Fortnite	82 −276%	300−350 +276%
Forza Horizon 4	74 −373%	350−400 +373%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 −325%	230−240 +325%
Grand Theft Auto V	75 −367%	350−400 +367%
Metro Exodus	44 −275%	160−170 +275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	130−140 −56.9%	210−220 +56.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	28 −457%	150−160 +457%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 −168%	170−180 +168%
Valorant	46 −1046%	500−550 +1046%
World of Tanks	230−240 −18.7%	270−280 +18.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	55 −113%	110−120 +113%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 −432%	190−200 +432%
Cyberpunk 2077	12 −400%	60−65 +400%
Dota 2	92 −389%	450−500 +389%
Far Cry 5	65−70 −140%	160−170 +140%
Forza Horizon 4	62 −384%	300−310 +384%
Forza Horizon 5	41 −471%	230−240 +471%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	61 −252%	210−220 +252%
Valorant	70 −653%	500−550 +653%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	30−35 −382%	150−160 +382%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 −385%	160−170 +385%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 −394%	850−900 +394%
Red Dead Redemption 2	17 −447%	90−95 +447%
World of Tanks	130−140 −271%	500−550 +271%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	38 −129%	85−90 +129%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −400%	90−95 +400%
Cyberpunk 2077	7 −400%	35−40 +400%
Far Cry 5	55−60 −186%	160−170 +186%
Forza Horizon 4	45 −389%	220−230 +389%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 −459%	170−180 +459%
Metro Exodus	41 −254%	140−150 +254%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 −383%	140−150 +383%
Valorant	40 −975%	400−450 +975%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%
Dota 2	29 −538%	180−190 +538%
Grand Theft Auto V	29 −383%	140−150 +383%
Metro Exodus	12 −725%	95−100 +725%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	60−65 −237%	200−210 +237%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14 −392%	60−65 +392%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	29 −383%	140−150 +383%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18 −406%	90−95 +406%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 −278%	65−70 +278%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 −367%	14−16 +367%
Dota 2	59 −392%	290−300 +392%
Far Cry 5	27−30 −289%	100−110 +289%
Fortnite	24−27 −284%	95−100 +284%
Forza Horizon 4	26 −400%	130−140 +400%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 −582%	110−120 +582%
Valorant	21 −1105%	250−260 +1105%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2

30−35

+0%

30−35

+0%

This is how GTX 1650 and RTX 5080 compete in popular games:

RTX 5080 is 407% faster in 1080p
RTX 5080 is 400% faster in 1440p
RTX 5080 is 378% faster in 4K

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

in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 5080 is 1105% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RTX 5080 is ahead in 44 tests (98%)
there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	19.71	100.00
Recency	23 April 2019	30 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	12 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	360 Watt

GTX 1650 has 380% lower power consumption.

RTX 5080, on the other hand, has a 407.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 200% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5080 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 in performance tests.

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