NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand 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
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 62% higher core clock speed: 1485 MHz vs 915 MHz
- Around 70% higher boost clock speed: 1665 MHz vs 980 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 6008 MHz
- Around 45% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7881 vs 5427
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10959 vs 8276
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3627
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10959 vs 8276
- Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3627
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 April 2019 vs 25 August 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz vs 915 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz vs 980 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 28 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 6008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 vs 5427 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 vs 8276 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3627 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 vs 8276 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3627 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3354 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand
- Around 23% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 694 vs 564
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 694 vs 564 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 | 5427 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 | 694 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 8276 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3627 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3354 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 8276 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3627 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3354 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM Rebrand | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Kepler |
| Code name | TU107 | GK104 |
| Launch date | 30 April 2019 | 25 August 2013 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | |
| Place in performance rating | 376 | 320 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz | 980 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz | 915 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Floating-point performance | 2,634 gflops | |
| Pipelines | 1344 | |
| Texture fill rate | 109.8 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 170 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 3,540 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |
| Length | 241 mm | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 6008 MHz |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 192.3 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4810
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla M6
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P3000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000 Max-Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla K80
