
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 140W, a 65W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile
2022Why buy it
- ✅118.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌86.7% higher power demand at 140W vs 75W.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile
2022Why buy it
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 140W, a 65W reduction.
Why buy it
- ✅118.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (8 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: Ampere on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 8 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌86.7% higher power demand at 140W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile better than GeForce GTX 1650?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 130 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 112 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 93 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 64 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 105 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 87 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 66 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 46 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 47 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 41 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 29 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 24 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 364 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 318 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 264 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 224 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 261 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 218 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 186 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 151 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 129 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 111 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 95 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 72 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 793 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 634 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 529 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 396 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 595 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 476 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 396 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 297 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 396 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 317 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 264 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 198 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 281 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 245 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 201 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 173 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 215 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 192 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 158 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 133 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 131 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 112 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 90 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 72 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile

GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650
The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile
GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile
The GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 4 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 915 MHz to 1410 MHz. It has 5632 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 140W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 44 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 17,621 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile's 17,621 — the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile leads by 123.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile uses Ampere, both on 12 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5,632 (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 15.88 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1410 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 17,621+124% |
| Architecture | Turing | Ampere |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 5632+529% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 15.88 TFLOPS+432% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz+18% | 1410 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 80+150% |
| TMUs | 56 | 176+214% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 5.5 MB+525% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile supports the newer DLSS 2 Super Resolution, whereas the GeForce GTX 1650 is capped at Upscaling support.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | DLSS 2 Super Resolution |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile has 8 GB. The GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 448 GB/s (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile) — a 250% advantage for the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile) — the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 448 GB/s+250% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.2+2% |
| Vulkan | 1.4+17% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3+200% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 7th Gen NVENC (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile's 140W — a 60.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-46% | 140W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-54% | 650W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 229mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-13% | 80°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 125.9+20% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 3070 Ti Mobile |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | GA104 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 4 2022 |
| Ranking | #323 | #100 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













