NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce MX250
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce MX250
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 1650 and GeForce MX250 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GTX 1650 outperforms GeForce MX250 by ~6% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+6%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce GTX 1650 (~23%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GTX 1650
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Reasons to consider GeForce MX250
- Lower stated power consumption
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1 · NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3331
100100
10054
5656
Graphics card ranking
Positions 123–128of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTX 1650
146 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
33Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
30Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
53Better
43
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DisplayPort
HDMI
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Power consumptionBetter
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Memory type
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
Transistor countBetter
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 1650 and GeForce MX250 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
GTX 1650GeForce MX250
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
169 FPS
157 FPS
1080p Ultra
116 FPS
110 FPS
1440p Ultra
64 FPS
59 FPS
4K Ultra
22 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GTX 1650169 FPSGeForce MX250157 FPSGTX 1650116 FPSGeForce MX250110 FPSGTX 165064 FPSGeForce MX25059 FPSGTX 165022 FPSGeForce MX25021 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 1650109 FPSGeForce MX250101 FPSGTX 165092 FPSGeForce MX25087 FPSGTX 165046 FPSGeForce MX25043 FPSGTX 165015 FPSGeForce MX25014 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GTX 1650138 FPSGeForce MX250128 FPSGTX 165087 FPSGeForce MX25083 FPSGTX 165057 FPSGeForce MX25053 FPSGTX 165033 FPSGeForce MX25031 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 165089 FPSGeForce MX25083 FPSGTX 165073 FPSGeForce MX25069 FPSGTX 165041 FPSGeForce MX25038 FPSGTX 165015 FPSGeForce MX25015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10033316%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10040385%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10039383%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10056560%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 10043422%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10042412%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10039383%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10045450%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10040385%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.112.1
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
UpscalingNVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)NVIDIA Image Scaling (NIS)
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 6.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTuringPascal / Turing / Ampere
Process node12 nmBetter14 nm
Release date20192019
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count4700 millionBetter1800 million
Die size200 mm²74 mm²Better
Shader units / cores896Better384
Base clock1485 MHz1519 MHzBetter
Boost clock1665 MHzBetter1582 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3.0 x4
Length229 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessDual-slotIGP
Recommended PSU250 WOEM dependent
Power connectorNoneNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 2.0OEM dependent
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitors3OEM dependent
Max resolution7680 × 4320Depends on host system
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM4 GB GDDR5Better2 GB GDDR5
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5 / GDDR6
Memory bus128 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS2.984Better1.215
Other comparisons
Arc A310IntelReviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 69
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 1650 or GeForce MX250?+
GTX 1650 has the higher overall gaming score, while GTX 1650 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTX 1650 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTX 1650 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GTX 1650 offers more overall performance, while GTX 1650 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTX 1650 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GTX 1650 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GTX 1650 leads in combined 1440p performance. GTX 1650 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GTX 1650 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GeForce MX250 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GeForce MX250 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to GTX 1650 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.