GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs GTX 460 SE

Place in the ranking	619	268
Place by popularity	not in top-100	68
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.09	no data
Power efficiency	2.39	28.17
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GF104	TU116
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	15 November 2010 (14 years ago)	23 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$160	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	288	1024
Core clock speed	650 MHz	1350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1485 MHz
Number of transistors	1,950 million	6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	104 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	31.20	95.04
Floating-point processing power	0.7488 TFLOPS	3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	48	64

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	medium sized
Bus support	16x PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	210 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 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	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1700 MHz	1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	108.8 GB/s	192.0 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.

Number of display connectors	2	no data
Display Connectors	2 x Dual-Link DVI-I1 x Mini HDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.140
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 460 SE 5.14

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 20.21
+293%

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 460 SE 1984

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+293%

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	14−16 −314%	58 +314%
1440p	10−12 −320%	42 +320%
4K	6−7 −350%	27 +350%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	11.43	no data
1440p	16.00	no data
4K	26.67	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	61 +0%	61 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	49 +0%	49 +0%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	53 +0%	53 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	46 +0%	46 +0%
Far Cry 5	69 +0%	69 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	84 +0%	84 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Hitman 3	51 +0%	51 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	181 +0%	181 +0%
Metro Exodus	91 +0%	91 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	44 +0%	44 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	201 +0%	201 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	32 +0%	32 +0%
Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	47 +0%	47 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	36 +0%	36 +0%
Far Cry 5	58 +0%	58 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	59 +0%	59 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Hitman 3	50 +0%	50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	180 +0%	180 +0%
Metro Exodus	79 +0%	79 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	39 +0%	39 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	75 +0%	75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	183 +0%	183 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	27 +0%	27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	15 +0%	15 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	31 +0%	31 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	34 +0%	34 +0%
Far Cry 5	39 +0%	39 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
Hitman 3	43 +0%	43 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	64 +0%	64 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	63 +0%	63 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	39 +0%	39 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	22 +0%	22 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	38 +0%	38 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16 +0%	16 +0%
Far Cry 5	26 +0%	26 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Hitman 3	28 +0%	28 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Metro Exodus	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	120 +0%	120 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

30−35

+0%

30−35

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	20 +0%	20 +0%
Hitman 3	16 +0%	16 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	42 +0%	42 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	25 +0%	25 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6 +0%	6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12 +0%	12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

18−20

+0%

18−20

+0%

This is how GTX 460 SE and GTX 1650 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 314% faster in 1080p
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 320% faster in 1440p
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 350% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.14	20.21
Recency	15 November 2010	23 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	50 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile has a 293.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 460 SE in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 460 SE is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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.