NVIDIA
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Titan RTX
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
Titan RTX
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GTX 1650 and Titan RTX across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Titan RTX outperforms GTX 1650 by 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.+58%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better.GeForce GTX 1650 vs Titan RTX: key takeaway
The comparison of GTX 1650 and Titan RTX shows a 58% advantage for Titan RTX in gaming performance, while GTX 1650 may still be stronger in value for money. Use the sections below to check whether that lead comes from real FPS, specifications, efficiency, price or platform features.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3352
10062
10064
56100
COMPARISON RESULT
GTX 1650 is the best overall choice
GTX 1650 leads in combined game performance. GTX 1650 offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
GTX 1650 leads in the combined performance index
GTX 1650 costs less
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 155–160of 317
COMPARISON VERDICT
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.
GeForce GTX 1650
100/100 · Price $169The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OVERALL SCORE
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
The Summary score section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
33
52Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
30
44Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28
41Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
62
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
58Better
56
FULL COMPARISON
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
The Specifications section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aDisplayPort 1.4a
HDMIHDMI 2.0HDMI 2.0
Device classDesktopDesktop
Max monitors35
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
USB Type-CNoYes
Power consumption75 WBetter280 W
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
TFLOPS2.98416.31Better
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Clock speed1485 - 1665 MHzBetter1350 - 1770 MHz
Base clock1485 MHzBetter1350 MHz
Boost clock1665 MHz1770 MHzBetter
VRAM4 GB GDDR524 GB GDDR6Better
Memory frequency8 GHz14 GHzBetter
Power connectorNone8+8 pin
Release date20192018
ArchitectureTuringTuring
Memory bus128 bit384 bitBetter
Memory bandwidth128 GB/s672 GB/sBetter
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3x16
Power consumption75 WBetter280 W
Process node12 nm12 nm
Recommended PSU250 WBetter600 W
Length229 mmBetter267 mm
ThicknessDual-slotDual-slot
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5
Launch price$169Better$2499
Shader units / cores8964608Better
Die size200 mm²Better754 mm²
Memory cacheL1 64 KB, L2 1 MBL1 64 KB, L2 6 MB
Transistor count4700 million18600 millionBetter
GAME TEST BENCH
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX 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 1650Titan RTX
Verified H2HCommunity VerifiedEstimatedPredicted
Black Myth: Wukong
1080p High
20 FPSEstimated 64%
26 FPSEstimated 66%
1080p Ultra
17 FPSEstimated 64%
22 FPSEstimated 66%
1440p Ultra
9 FPSEstimated 58%
16 FPSEstimated 66%
4K Ultra
5 FPSEstimated 55%
9 FPSEstimated 66%
Black Myth: WukongGTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
Call of Duty: WarzoneGTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
Counter-Strike 2GTX 1650169 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX216 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 1650116 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX152 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165064 FPSEstimated 66%Titan RTX118 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165022 FPSEstimated 62%Titan RTX59 FPSEstimated 74%
Cyberpunk 2077GTX 1650109 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX139 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165092 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX120 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165046 FPSEstimated 66%Titan RTX86 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165015 FPSEstimated 62%Titan RTX39 FPSEstimated 74%
Forza Horizon 5GTX 1650138 FPSEstimated 78%Titan RTX176 FPSEstimated 80%GTX 165087 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX114 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165057 FPSEstimated 66%Titan RTX106 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165033 FPSEstimated 62%Titan RTX86 FPSEstimated 74%
God of War RagnarökGTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
Hogwarts LegacyGTX 165089 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX114 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165073 FPSEstimated 72%Titan RTX95 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165041 FPSEstimated 66%Titan RTX77 FPSEstimated 74%GTX 165015 FPSEstimated 62%Titan RTX40 FPSEstimated 74%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2024GTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
Monster Hunter WildsGTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
StarfieldGTX 165020 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX26 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 165017 FPSEstimated 64%Titan RTX22 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16509 FPSEstimated 58%Titan RTX16 FPSEstimated 66%GTX 16505 FPSEstimated 55%Titan RTX9 FPSEstimated 66%
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
The Benchmarks section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100335245%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100406040%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100396550%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1005610056%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001006247%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
The Detailed comparison section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100437453%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100427151%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100396550%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100457854%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100406649%
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
The Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DirectX12.112.2
Vulkan1.41.4
OpenGL4.64.6
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5OpenCL 3.0, CUDA 7.5
Architecture and release
The Architecture and release section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
ArchitectureTuringTuring
Process node12 nm12 nm
Release date20192018
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
The Core layout and clocks section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Transistor count4700 million18600 millionBetter
Die size200 mm²Better754 mm²
Shader units / cores8964608Better
Base clock1485 MHzBetter1350 MHz
Boost clock1665 MHz1770 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
The Form factor and compatibility section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 3x16
Length229 mmBetter267 mm
ThicknessDual-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU250 WBetter600 W
Power connectorNone8+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
The Display outputs section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
HDMIHDMI 2.0HDMI 2.0
DisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4aDisplayPort 1.4a
USB Type-CNoYes
Max monitors35
Max resolution7680 × 43207680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
The VRAM capacity and bandwidth section compares GTX 1650 and Titan RTX with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
VRAM4 GB GDDR524 GB GDDR6Better
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Memory bus128 bit384 bitBetter
TFLOPS2.98416.31Better
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Arc A310Intel
Navi II 2CU 7xxx/9xxxAMDReviews and questions
AI EXPLAIN · HEAD TO HEAD
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.
REAL CONFIGURATIONS
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: GTX 1650 or Titan RTX?+
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?+
GTX 1650 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?+
GTX 1650 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.