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: 10170 vs 7567
• Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 498 vs 389
• Around 37% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 57389 vs 41946
• Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 200.776 vs 151.899
• Around 5% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1938.08 vs 1844.67
• Around 43% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 15.298 vs 10.683
• 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
• Around 47% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 5393 vs 3667

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 - Video Composition (Frames/s): 115.919 vs 108.443
• Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 644.054 vs 568.183
• 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

Compare benchmarks

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

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	10170 7567
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	498 389
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	57389 41946
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	200.776 151.899
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1938.08 1844.67
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.298 10.683
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	108.443 115.919
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	568.183 644.054
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	5393 3667

Compare specifications (specs)