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

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 298.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 13.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 140W, a 65W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 24 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

2025

Why buy it

✅217.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅500% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (24 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌
1241.6% HIGHER MSRP
$1,999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 13.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌86.7% higher power demand at 140W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

2025

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,850 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Delivers 298.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 13.3 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $1,999 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 140W, a 65W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅217.5% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅500% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (24 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Blackwell 2.0 (2025−2026) on 5nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 24 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌
1241.6% HIGHER MSRP
$1,999 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 13.3 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($1,999 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌86.7% higher power demand at 140W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is clearly the better overall GPU here. RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell averages 217.5% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 26,498 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is a 2025 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2025 generation instead of 2019, 236.7% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 24 GB instead of 4 GB, and 100.0% more ray-tracing hardware. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is about 1241.6% more expensive on MSRP at $1,999 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 217.5% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 236.7% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium. If you are comfortable paying the premium for the stronger gaming result, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is the one to buy. If staying closer to budget matters more, GeForce GTX 1650 still makes more sense on price alone, but the performance trade-off is much harder to justify by current standards.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. This mostly comes down to price. If you want to stay closer to $149 MSRP, it remains a strong choice; if you are comfortable paying more, RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell earns that extra money with a clearly stronger gaming result and a more complete overall package.

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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
1080p
low	94 FPS	184 FPS
medium	83 FPS	163 FPS
high	70 FPS	141 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	103 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	159 FPS
medium	74 FPS	135 FPS
high	60 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	74 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	81 FPS
medium	39 FPS	69 FPS
high	27 FPS	51 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	46 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
1080p
low	136 FPS	461 FPS
medium	113 FPS	397 FPS
high	94 FPS	320 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	281 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	367 FPS
medium	62 FPS	307 FPS
high	44 FPS	246 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	201 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	199 FPS
medium	27 FPS	167 FPS
high	21 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	117 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
1080p
low	323 FPS	895 FPS
medium	283 FPS	731 FPS
high	205 FPS	643 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	556 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	699 FPS
medium	202 FPS	567 FPS
high	151 FPS	488 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	416 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	475 FPS
medium	117 FPS	388 FPS
high	79 FPS	332 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	270 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
1080p
low	261 FPS	357 FPS
medium	211 FPS	315 FPS
high	191 FPS	275 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	239 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	278 FPS
medium	158 FPS	247 FPS
high	135 FPS	212 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	180 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	176 FPS
medium	74 FPS	151 FPS
high	65 FPS	116 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	95 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

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.

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 18 2025. It features the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1230 MHz to 2055 MHz. It has 8960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 140W. Manufactured using 5 nm process technology. It features 70 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 26,498 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell's 26,498 — the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell leads by 236.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell uses Blackwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 5 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8,960 (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 36.83 TFLOPS (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 2055 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
G3D Mark Score	7,869	26,498+237%
Architecture	Turing	Blackwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	5 nm
Shading Units	896	8960+900%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	36.83 TFLOPS+1134%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	2055 MHz+23%
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	56	280+400%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	8.8 MB+900%
L2 Cache	1 MB	48 MB+4700%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
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 RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell has 24 GB. The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell offers 500% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 432 GB/s (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell) — a 237.5% advantage for the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 48 MB (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell) — the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	24 GB+500%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	432 GB/s+238%
Bus Width	128-bit	192-bit+50%
L2 Cache	1 MB	48 MB+4700%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.2 (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
DirectX	12	12.2+2%
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 9th Gen NVENC (2x) (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 6th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	9th Gen NVENC (2x)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	6th Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell's 140W — a 60.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 650W (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell
TDP	75W-46%	140W
Recommended PSU	300W-54%	650W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	189.3+80%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell launched at $1999. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 92.5% less ($1850 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 13.3 (RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 297% better value. The RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).