NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is decisively superior to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti, delivering 310.4% higher performance in the only shared benchmark, while also offering a more advanced architecture, newer memory, and significantly lower power consumption. The GTX 560 Ti, an older Fermi-based card, cannot compete on raw compute or modern API support, making the 1650 SUPER the clear choice for any contemporary workload.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the GTX 1650 SUPER than the GTX 560 Ti in the shared benchmark?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43875, while the GTX 560 Ti scores 10690. This gives the 1650 SUPER a 310.4% advantage, meaning it performs more than four times better.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each card?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 11047, which places it in the 50th percentile of all GPUs. The GTX 560 Ti has an average score of 10690, placing it in the 49th percentile.

Q: Which card has better DirectX and Vulkan support?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 560 Ti only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and has no Vulkan support listed.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER features 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 560 Ti has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus with 128.3 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What is the power draw difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER has a TDP of 100 W and requires a 300 W power supply with a single 6-pin connector. The GTX 560 Ti has a TDP of 170 W and requires a 450 W power supply with two 6-pin connectors.

Q: Which card is more recent and what are their launch prices?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER was released on 2019-11-21 with a launch MSRP of 159 USD. The GTX 560 Ti was released on 2011-01-24 with a launch MSRP of 249 USD.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two NVIDIA cards is profound, spanning nearly a decade of GPU design evolution. The GTX 1650 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture using the TU116 chip, manufactured on a 12 nm process at TSMC. This modern design integrates 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 23.2M / mm². In contrast, the GTX 560 Ti relies on the Fermi 2.0 architecture with the GF114 chip, fabricated on a much older 40 nm process. It contains only 1,950 million transistors spread across a larger 332 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 5.9M / mm².

The compute capabilities highlight the generational leap. The GTX 1650 SUPER packs 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. Its FP32 performance reaches 4.416 TFLOPS, with FP16 compute at 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1). The GTX 560 Ti is far more modest, with 384 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Its FP32 output is only 1,263.4 GFLOPS, and it has no FP16 capability listed. This translates to pixel rates of 55.20 GPixel/s and texture rates of 138.0 GTexel/s for the 1650 SUPER, versus 13.17 GPixel/s and 52.67 GTexel/s for the 560 Ti.

Memory technology also differs significantly. The 1650 SUPER uses GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the 560 Ti uses GDDR5 at 1002 MHz (4 Gbps effective). Although the 560 Ti has a wider 256-bit bus compared to the 128-bit bus on the 1650 SUPER, the newer memory type gives the 1650 SUPER higher total bandwidth at 192.0 GB/s versus 128.3 GB/s. Both cards are dual-slot and have a length of 229 mm (9 inches), but the 1650 SUPER is more power-efficient with a 100 W TDP versus the 170 W TDP of the 560 Ti.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available between these two cards is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are lopsided. The GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43875, while the GTX 560 Ti scores 10690. This represents a delta of 310.4% in favor of the 1650 SUPER, a massive margin that underscores the complete performance dominance of the newer card.

To contextualize this result, look at the nearest rivals for each card from the data. The GTX 1650 SUPER's average score of 11047 puts it within 0.2% of the AMD Radeon RX 550 (avgScore 11075) and 0.4% of the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q (avgScore 11088). It is 1.5% ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 (avgScore 10883). On the other side, the GTX 560 Ti's average score of 10690 is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6600S (avgScore 10629) and 1% ahead of the AMD Radeon R9 M275X (avgScore 10582), but it trails the NVIDIA Quadro K2200 by 0.7% (avgScore 10761) and the AMD Radeon Pro 450 by 1.1% (avgScore 10804). While both cards sit near the 50th percentile (50 for the 1650 SUPER, 49 for the 560 Ti), the raw OpenCL score shows that the 1650 SUPER operates in a different performance tier entirely.

Specification Differences

The specifications reveal stark contrasts in nearly every category. The GTX 1650 SUPER uses a 12 nm process and the Turing architecture, while the GTX 560 Ti uses a 40 nm process and Fermi 2.0. Transistor counts are 6,600 million versus 1,950 million, and die sizes are 284 mm² versus 332 mm². The GTX 1650 SUPER has a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1725 MHz; the GTX 560 Ti has no base or boost clocks listed.

Memory configurations differ: 4 GB GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus versus 1024 MB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. Bandwidth is 192.0 GB/s for the 1650 SUPER and 128.3 GB/s for the 560 Ti. The shading units are 1280 versus 384, TMUs are 80 versus 64, and ROPs are the same at 32. Pixel rate is 55.20 GPixel/s versus 13.17 GPixel/s, and texture rate is 138.0 GTexel/s versus 52.67 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 4.416 TFLOPS versus 1,263.4 GFLOPS. The 1650 SUPER has FP16 capability at 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1); the 560 Ti has none.

Power requirements are also different: TDP is 100 W versus 170 W, power connectors are 1x 6-pin versus 2x 6-pin, and suggested PSU is 300 W versus 450 W. The 1650 SUPER uses PCIe 3.0 x16, while the 560 Ti uses PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the 1650 SUPER; the 560 Ti has 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. API support shows DirectX 12 (12_1) versus DirectX 12 (11_0), with the 1650 SUPER also supporting Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1650 SUPER wins in every measurable category where data exists. In the sole head-to-head benchmark, it is 310.4% ahead. Its FP32 throughput is roughly 3.5 times higher, and its pixel and texture rates are more than four and two times higher, respectively. The 4 GB GDDR6 frame buffer is four times larger than the 1024 MB GDDR5, making it far more suitable for modern textures and resolutions. Its support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) ensures compatibility with current game engines and applications, while the 560 Ti's lack of Vulkan support is a critical limitation.

The GTX 560 Ti's only advantages are historical or physical. It has a wider 256-bit memory bus, though this does not translate to higher bandwidth. It was released earlier on 2011-01-24 and belongs to the GeForce 500 generation, with a predecessor in GeForce 400 and a successor in GeForce 600. Its dimensions include no listed height or width, unlike the 1650 SUPER which has a height of 111 mm and width of 35 mm. It also has an extra DVI output, offering 2x DVI versus the 1650 SUPER's single DVI, which may appeal to users with legacy monitors.

The Verdict

Choose the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER without hesitation. The data shows a 310.4% performance lead in the Geekbench OpenCL test, alongside superior memory capacity, bandwidth, and modern API support. Its 12 nm Turing architecture with 6,600 million transistors delivers 4.416 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, dwarfing the 560 Ti's 1,263.4 GFLOPS. The 1650 SUPER also consumes 70 W less power (100 W versus 170 W), requires a 300 W PSU instead of 450 W, and uses a single 6-pin connector rather than two. With a launch MSRP of 159 USD, it was also cheaper than the 560 Ti's 249 USD launch MSRP.

The GTX 560 Ti is only relevant for legacy systems or collectors. Its Fermi 2.0 architecture on 40 nm is obsolete, lacking Vulkan support and limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). The 1024 MB GDDR5 memory is insufficient for modern workloads, and its 170 W TDP with dual 6-pin connectors makes it less efficient. While its 49th percentile ranking is close to the 1650 SUPER's 50th percentile, this is misleading given the vast gap in the single shared benchmark. For any current gaming, creative, or compute task, the GTX 1650 SUPER is the definitive choice.