NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 8 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 24% higher core clock speed: 1020 MHz vs 823 MHz
- 1323x more texture fill rate: 69.72 GTexel/s vs 52.7 GTexel / s
- 2.3x more pipelines: 896 vs 384
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 40 nm
- 4.9x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 170 Watt
- 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8824 vs 3362
- 2.6x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8824 vs 3362
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 23 April 2019 vs 8 March 2011 |
| Core clock speed | 1020 MHz vs 823 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 69.72 GTexel/s vs 52.7 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 896 vs 384 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 40 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 170 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 1 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8824 vs 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8824 vs 3362 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM
- 2x more memory clock speed: 4008 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective)
- Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 6895 vs 3707
- Around 86% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 6895 vs 3707
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Memory clock speed | 4008 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 6895 vs 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 6895 vs 3707 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6160 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 326 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35607 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 129.441 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1047.138 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.882 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 78.563 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 346.498 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8824 | 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 6895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8824 | 3362 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 6895 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3352 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2950 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Fermi 2.0 |
| Code name | TU117 | GF114 |
| Launch date | 23 April 2019 | 8 March 2011 |
| Place in performance rating | 459 | 471 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1245 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1020 MHz | 823 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 40 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 69.72 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 4.462 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 2.231 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 896 | 384 |
| Pixel fill rate | 39.84 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 69.72 GTexel/s | 52.7 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 170 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | 1,950 million |
| Floating-point performance | 1,263.4 gflops | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Length | 229 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | 128.3 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) | 4008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
ATIRadeon X700 SE
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
ATIFireGL V7200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
ATIFireGL V5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 780
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon R9 M470X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200 Max-Q
