GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile vs TITAN Xp

Place in performance ranking	53	282
Place by popularity	not in top-100	62
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	53.60	40.34
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code name	GP102	N18P-G0, N18P-G61
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	6 April 2017 (7 years ago)	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$1,199	no data
Current price	$174 (0.1x MSRP)	$301

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

TITAN Xp has 33% better value for money than GTX 1650 Mobile.

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 cores	3840	1024
Core clock speed	1405 MHz	1380 MHz
Boost clock speed	1582 MHz	1560 MHz
Number of transistors	11,800 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	379.7	99.84
Floating-point performance	12,150 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on TITAN Xp and GeForce GTX 1650 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 size	no data	medium sized
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5X	GDDR5, GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	11408 MHz	12000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	547.6 GB/s	192.0 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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 Connectors	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.4	6.5
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.2.140
CUDA	6.1	7.5

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.

TITAN Xp 50.29
+173%

GTX 1650 Mobile 18.43

TITAN Xp outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile by 173% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

TITAN Xp 19424
+173%

GTX 1650 Mobile 7116

TITAN Xp outperforms GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile by 173% in Passmark.

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	150−160 +163%	57 −163%
1440p	100−110 +170%	37 −170%
4K	60−65 +161%	23 −161%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

140−150

+169%

52
−169%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	150−160 +173%	55 −173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	110−120 +162%	42 −162%
Battlefield 5	220−230 +172%	81 −172%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	130−140 +155%	51 −155%
Cyberpunk 2077	110−120 +168%	41 −168%
Far Cry 5	180−190 +173%	66 −173%
Far Cry New Dawn	210−220 +166%	79 −166%
Forza Horizon 4	220−230 +168%	82 −168%
Hitman 3	120−130 +155%	47 −155%
Horizon Zero Dawn	280−290 +169%	104 −169%
Metro Exodus	220−230 +168%	82 −168%
Red Dead Redemption 2	190−200 +168%	71 −168%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	210−220 +166%	79 −166%
Watch Dogs: Legion	130−140 +171%	48 −171%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	130−140 +171%	48 −171%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	65−70 +171%	24 −171%
Battlefield 5	190−200 +171%	70 −171%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	120−130 +155%	47 −155%
Cyberpunk 2077	85−90 +166%	32 −166%
Far Cry 5	140−150 +164%	53 −164%
Far Cry New Dawn	140−150 +159%	54 −159%
Forza Horizon 4	400−450 +170%	148 −170%
Hitman 3	100−105 +156%	39 −156%
Horizon Zero Dawn	400−450 +170%	148 −170%
Metro Exodus	160−170 +162%	61 −162%
Red Dead Redemption 2	160−170 +162%	61 −162%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	170−180 +166%	64 −166%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	160−170 +158%	62 −158%
Watch Dogs: Legion	350−400 +148%	141 −148%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	80−85 +167%	30 −167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24 +163%	8 −163%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	90−95 +165%	34 −165%
Cyberpunk 2077	80−85 +167%	30 −167%
Far Cry 5	100−105 +150%	40 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +158%	62 −158%
Horizon Zero Dawn	150−160 +163%	57 −163%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	150−160 +173%	55 −173%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	95−100 +164%	36 −164%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +165%	17 −165%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

140−150

+169%

52
−169%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	110−120 +156%	43 −156%
Far Cry New Dawn	130−140 +171%	48 −171%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	60−65 +173%	22 −173%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45 +150%	16−18 −150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	70−75 +169%	26 −169%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +167%	15 −167%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +171%	35 −171%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +164%	35−40 −164%
Hitman 3	70−75 +169%	26 −169%
Horizon Zero Dawn	120−130 +173%	44 −173%
Metro Exodus	100−105 +156%	39 −156%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100−105 +170%	35−40 −170%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +162%	21−24 −162%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 +150%	12 −150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

90−95
+173%

−173%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	55−60 +162%	21 −162%
Far Cry New Dawn	45−50 +165%	17 −165%
Hitman 3	35−40 +150%	14 −150%
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +150%	20−22 −150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40−45 +167%	15 −167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +162%	21 −162%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−33 +150%	12 −150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27 +167%	9−10 −167%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +170%	10−11 −170%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +140%	5 −140%
Far Cry 5	30−33 +150%	12 −150%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +160%	24−27 −160%
Horizon Zero Dawn	60−65 +161%	23 −161%
Metro Exodus	50−55 +163%	19 −163%
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20 +157%	7−8 −157%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

45−50
+165%

−165%

This is how TITAN Xp and GTX 1650 Mobile compete in popular games:

TITAN Xp is 163% faster in 1080p
TITAN Xp is 170% faster in 1440p
TITAN Xp is 161% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	50.29	18.43
Recency	6 April 2017	23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount	12 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	50 Watt