GeForce GTX 1650 vs TITAN V CEO Edition

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared TITAN V CEO Edition and GeForce GTX 1650, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

TITAN V CEO Edition
2018
32 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
41.22
+116%

TITAN V CEO Edition outperforms GTX 1650 by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking85276
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data36.75
Power efficiency12.1518.78
ArchitectureVolta (2017−2020)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGV100TU117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date21 June 2018 (6 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores5120896
Core clock speed1200 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speed1455 MHz1665 MHz
Number of transistors21,100 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate465.693.24
Floating-point processing power14.9 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs12832
TMUs32056
Tensor Cores640no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount32 GB4 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed848 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth868.4 GB/s128.0 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.07.5

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.

TITAN V CEO Edition 41.22
+116%
GTX 1650 19.11

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.

TITAN V CEO Edition 16987
+116%
GTX 1650 7877

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 HD140−150
+103%
69
−103%
1440p85−90
+113%
40
−113%
4K45−50
+95.7%
23
−95.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.16
1440pno data3.73
4Kno data6.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 94
+0%
94
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 66
+0%
66
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 77
+0%
77
+0%
Valorant 85
+0%
85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75
+0%
75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Dota 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Far Cry 5 90
+0%
90
+0%
Fortnite 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 74
+0%
74
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75
+0%
75
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 46
+0%
46
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Dota 2 92
+0%
92
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 61
+0%
61
+0%
Valorant 70
+0%
70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
World of Tanks 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 41
+0%
41
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 40
+0%
40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+0%
3
+0%
Dota 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21
+0%
21
+0%

This is how TITAN V CEO Edition and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • TITAN V CEO Edition is 103% faster in 1080p
  • TITAN V CEO Edition is 113% faster in 1440p
  • TITAN V CEO Edition is 96% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 41.22 19.11
Recency 21 June 2018 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 75 Watt

TITAN V CEO Edition has a 115.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 months, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The TITAN V CEO Edition 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.

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 TITAN V CEO Edition
TITAN V CEO Edition
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

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.


3.7 20 votes

Rate TITAN V CEO Edition on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 24516 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.