NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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 RTX 3050 Ti

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• 2.5x more pipelines: 2560 vs 1024
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 8 nm vs 12 nm
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10117 vs 7539
• Around 31% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 497 vs 380
• Around 38% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 57885 vs 41907
• Around 51% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 229.393 vs 152.235
• Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 2082.931 vs 1843.045
• Around 55% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 16.561 vs 10.681
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 134.68 vs 115.607
• Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 16098 vs 12180
• Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 16098 vs 12180

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

• Around 84% higher core clock speed: 1350 MHz vs 735 MHz
• Around 43% higher boost clock speed: 1485 MHz vs 1035 MHz
• Around 15% higher texture fill rate: 95.04 GTexel/s vs 82.80 GTexel/s
• Around 50% lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 7% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.098 vs 599.217
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 8926 vs 3717
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 8062 vs 3358
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 8926 vs 3717
• 2.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 8062 vs 3358
• 7.8x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3656 vs 469

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	10117 7539
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	497 380
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	57885 41907
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	229.393 152.235
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2082.931 1843.045
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16.561 10.681
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	134.68 115.607
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	599.217 644.098
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16098 12180
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3717 8926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 8062
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	16098 12180
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3717 8926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 8062
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	469 3656

Compare specifications (specs)