
GeForce GTX 1650
Popular choices:

GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
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
- ✅Costs $650 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 32.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 39.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 285W, a 210W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 310mm, a 81mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER across 39 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
2024Why buy it
- ✅255.7% more average FPS across 39 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌436.2% HIGHER MSRP$799 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 39.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($799 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌280% higher power demand at 285W vs 75W.
- ❌35.4% longer card at 310mm vs 229mm.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
2024Why buy it
- ✅Costs $650 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 32.6% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 39.8 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $799 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 285W, a 210W reduction.
- ✅Measures 229mm instead of 310mm, a 81mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.
Why buy it
- ✅255.7% more average FPS across 39 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Access to a newer frame-generation stack with DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (16 GB vs 4 GB).
- ✅More future proof: Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER across 39 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 16 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌No equivalent frame-generation stack like DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation (2023).
- ❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
Trade-offs
- ❌436.2% HIGHER MSRP$799 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 39.8 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($799 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌280% higher power demand at 285W vs 75W.
- ❌35.4% longer card at 310mm vs 229mm.
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER 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 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 94 FPS | 282 FPS |
| medium | 83 FPS | 271 FPS |
| high | 70 FPS | 234 FPS |
| ultra | 58 FPS | 193 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 87 FPS | 252 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 175 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 148 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 41 FPS | 147 FPS |
| medium | 39 FPS | 123 FPS |
| high | 27 FPS | 99 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 92 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 136 FPS | 719 FPS |
| medium | 113 FPS | 580 FPS |
| high | 94 FPS | 435 FPS |
| ultra | 71 FPS | 383 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 79 FPS | 529 FPS |
| medium | 62 FPS | 430 FPS |
| high | 44 FPS | 339 FPS |
| ultra | 35 FPS | 277 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 36 FPS | 255 FPS |
| medium | 27 FPS | 214 FPS |
| high | 21 FPS | 193 FPS |
| ultra | 15 FPS | 163 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 323 FPS | 999 FPS |
| medium | 283 FPS | 999 FPS |
| high | 205 FPS | 955 FPS |
| ultra | 169 FPS | 716 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 225 FPS | 976 FPS |
| medium | 202 FPS | 859 FPS |
| high | 151 FPS | 716 FPS |
| ultra | 117 FPS | 537 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 130 FPS | 573 FPS |
| medium | 117 FPS | 489 FPS |
| high | 79 FPS | 430 FPS |
| ultra | 50 FPS | 358 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 261 FPS | 962 FPS |
| medium | 211 FPS | 817 FPS |
| high | 191 FPS | 726 FPS |
| ultra | 166 FPS | 651 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 201 FPS | 753 FPS |
| medium | 158 FPS | 630 FPS |
| high | 135 FPS | 548 FPS |
| ultra | 113 FPS | 483 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 99 FPS | 509 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 438 FPS |
| high | 65 FPS | 389 FPS |
| ultra | 51 FPS | 341 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER

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 4070 Ti SUPER
GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER
The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 8 2024. It features the Ada Lovelace architecture. The core clock ranges from 2340 MHz to 2610 MHz. It has 8448 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 285W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 66 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 31,828 points. Launch price was $799.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER's 31,828 — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER leads by 304.5%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER uses Ada Lovelace, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8,448 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 44.1 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2610 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869 | 31,828+304% |
| Architecture | Turing | Ada Lovelace |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 5 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 8448+843% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS | 44.1 TFLOPS+1378% |
| Boost Clock | 1665 MHz | 2610 MHz+57% |
| ROPs | 32 | 96+200% |
| TMUs | 56 | 264+371% |
| L1 Cache | 0.88 MB | 8.3 MB+843% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 48 MB+4700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
A critical advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is support for DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation. This allows it to generate entire frames using AI/Algorithms, essentially doubling the frame rate in CPU-bound scenarios or heavy ray-tracing titles. The GeForce GTX 1650 lacks specific hardware/driver support for this native frame generation tier.The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER supports the newer DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution, whereas the GeForce GTX 1650 is capped at Upscaling support.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | DLSS 3.5 Super Resolution |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | DLSS 3.5 + Frame Generation |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | Yes (DLSS 3.5) |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has 16 GB. The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 672 GB/s (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER) — a 425% advantage for the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 48 MB (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER) — the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6X |
| Memory Bandwidth | 128 GB/s | 672 GB/s+425% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 48 MB+4700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 Ultimate |
| Vulkan | 1.4+8% | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 4+33% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 8th gen (Dual) (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC 5th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | NVENC 8th gen (Dual) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | NVDEC 5th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | AV1,H.264,H.265/HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER's 285W — a 116.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 750W (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER). Power connectors: None vs 16-pin (12VHPWR). Card length: 229mm vs 310mm, occupying 2 vs 3 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 72°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-74% | 285W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-60% | 750W |
| Power Connector | None | 16-pin (12VHPWR) |
| Length | 229mm | 310mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 2-33% | 3 |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-3% | 72°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9 | 111.7+6% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER launched at $799. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 81.4% less ($650 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 39.8 (GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 32.7% better value. The GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce RTX 4070 Ti SUPER |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-81% | $799 |
| Performance per Dollar | 52.8+33% | 39.8 |
| Codename | TU117 | AD103 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | January 8 2024 |
| Ranking | #323 | #10 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













