GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs NVS 300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 300 with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.

NVS 300
2011, $109
512 MB DDR3, 18 Watt
0.28

1650 Ti Mobile outperforms NVS 300 by a whopping 6471% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1394325
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.2128.63
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT218TU116
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date8 January 2011 (14 years ago)23 April 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores161024
Core clock speed520 MHz1350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1485 MHz
Number of transistors260 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate4.16095.04
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPS3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cache32 KB1024 KB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DMS-59No outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA1.27.5

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

NVS 300 0.28
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 18.40
+6471%

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.

NVS 300 120
Samples: 353
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+6397%
Samples: 4864

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 HD0−158
1440p0−144
4K-0−125

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 123
+0%
123
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+0%
59
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 84
+0%
84
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 95
+0%
95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90
+0%
90
+0%
Far Cry 5 67
+0%
67
+0%
Fortnite 121
+0%
121
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 78
+0%
78
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 181
+0%
181
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 73
+0%
73
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 69
+0%
69
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 36
+0%
36
+0%
Dota 2 119
+0%
119
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 60
+0%
60
+0%
Far Cry 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Fortnite 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 67
+0%
67
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 76
+0%
76
+0%
Metro Exodus 38
+0%
38
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 72
+0%
72
+0%
Valorant 180
+0%
180
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 67
+0%
67
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+0%
34
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 73
+0%
73
+0%
Far Cry 5 58
+0%
58
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+0%
39
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 69
+0%
69
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 164
+0%
164
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 41
+0%
41
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+0%
25
+0%
Valorant 84
+0%
84
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 28
+0%
28
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 13
+0%
13
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.28 18.40
Recency 8 January 2011 23 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 50 Watt

NVS 300 has 177.8% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6471.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 300 in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 300 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is a notebook one.

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 NVS 300
NVS 300
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 50 votes

Rate NVS 300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1957 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 300 or GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.