GeForce GTX 1650 TU106 vs Qualcomm Adreno 690

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking806not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency26.49no data
Architectureno dataTuring (2018−2022)
GPU code nameno dataTU106
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 December 2018 (5 years ago)18 June 2020 (4 years ago)

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 coresno data896
Core clock speedno data1410 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1590 MHz
Number of transistorsno data10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology5 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt90 Watt
Texture fill rateno data89.04
Floating-point processing powerno data2.849 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data56
Tensor Coresno data112
Ray Tracing Coresno data14

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1212 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 December 2018 18 June 2020
Chip lithography 5 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 90 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 690 has a 140% more advanced lithography process, and 1185.7% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650 TU106, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

We couldn't decide between Qualcomm Adreno 690 and GeForce GTX 1650 TU106. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 TU106 is a desktop 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.


Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 TU106
GeForce GTX 1650 TU106

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.


2.6 10 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 273 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 TU106 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.