RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1650

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

GTX 1650
2019
4 GB GDDR5
20.36

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 by an impressive 77% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking256126
Place by popularity3not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation18.99no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)Ada Lovelace
GPU code nameTU117no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)21 March 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 no data
Current price$185 (1.2x MSRP)no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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 cores8964608
Core clock speed1485 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1665 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt115 Watt (35 - 115 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate93.24no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1650 and RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed8000 MHz16000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.131no data
CUDA7.5no data

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 20.36
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 36.00
+76.8%

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 by 77% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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 13645
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 29411
+116%

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 by 116% 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 9203
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 20908
+127%

RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 by 127% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 HD70
−71.4%
120−130
+71.4%
1440p38
−71.1%
65−70
+71.1%
4K23
−73.9%
40−45
+73.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−71.9%
55−60
+71.9%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 53
−69.8%
90−95
+69.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
−70.2%
80−85
+70.2%
Battlefield 5 61
−63.9%
100−105
+63.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 76
−71.1%
130−140
+71.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−71.9%
55−60
+71.9%
Far Cry 5 68
−76.5%
120−130
+76.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 66
−66.7%
110−120
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 90
−66.7%
150−160
+66.7%
Hitman 3 76
−71.1%
130−140
+71.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55
−72.7%
95−100
+72.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 52
−73.1%
90−95
+73.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 58
−72.4%
100−105
+72.4%
Watch Dogs: Legion 56
−69.6%
95−100
+69.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 47
−70.2%
80−85
+70.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
−71.4%
60−65
+71.4%
Battlefield 5 53
−69.8%
90−95
+69.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
−72.4%
100−105
+72.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−71.9%
55−60
+71.9%
Far Cry 5 62
−61.3%
100−105
+61.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 62
−61.3%
100−105
+61.3%
Forza Horizon 4 83
−68.7%
140−150
+68.7%
Hitman 3 62
−61.3%
100−105
+61.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
−70.7%
70−75
+70.7%
Metro Exodus 35
−71.4%
60−65
+71.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
−60.7%
45−50
+60.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 47
−70.2%
80−85
+70.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74
−75.7%
130−140
+75.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
−66.7%
80−85
+66.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
−60%
40−45
+60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
−61.5%
21−24
+61.5%
Battlefield 5 51
−76.5%
90−95
+76.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
−71.9%
55−60
+71.9%
Far Cry 5 58
−72.4%
100−105
+72.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 57
−75.4%
100−105
+75.4%
Forza Horizon 4 65
−69.2%
110−120
+69.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 42
−66.7%
70−75
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
−66.7%
35−40
+66.7%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36
−66.7%
60−65
+66.7%
Hitman 3 37
−75.7%
65−70
+75.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 26
−73.1%
45−50
+73.1%
Metro Exodus 20
−75%
35−40
+75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
−76.5%
30−33
+76.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 29
−72.4%
50−55
+72.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
−61.5%
21−24
+61.5%
Battlefield 5 39
−66.7%
65−70
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
−75%
21−24
+75%
Far Cry 5 39
−66.7%
65−70
+66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 41
−70.7%
70−75
+70.7%
Forza Horizon 4 46
−73.9%
80−85
+73.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−59.1%
35−40
+59.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 14
−71.4%
24−27
+71.4%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20
−75%
35−40
+75%
Hitman 3 19
−57.9%
30−33
+57.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8
−75%
14−16
+75%
Metro Exodus 12
−75%
21−24
+75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−63.6%
18−20
+63.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 13
−61.5%
21−24
+61.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
−73.1%
45−50
+73.1%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 13
−61.5%
21−24
+61.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
−60%
8−9
+60%
Battlefield 5 21
−66.7%
35−40
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−75%
7−8
+75%
Far Cry 5 19
−57.9%
30−33
+57.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 21
−66.7%
35−40
+66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 30
−66.7%
50−55
+66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
−75%
14−16
+75%

This is how GTX 1650 and RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is 71% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is 71% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is 74% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.36 36.00
Recency 23 April 2019 21 March 2023
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 115 Watt

The RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile is a notebook 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 RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile
RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile

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.


3.7 20836 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2 votes

Rate RTX 3000 Ada Generation Mobile 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.