NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 870M represent two distinct eras of mobile and desktop graphics. The data shows a decisive generational leap, with the GTX 1650 SUPER holding a significant advantage over the older GTX 870M in the only directly comparable benchmark. While the GTX 870M was a capable part for its time, the architectural and technological advancements in the GTX 1650 SUPER render it the superior performer in nearly every measurable way.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The single direct comparison available in the data is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the results are emphatic. The GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43,875 points, while the GTX 870M manages 12,630 points. This translates to a delta of 247.4% in favor of the newer card, meaning the GTX 1650 SUPER delivers over three and a half times the compute performance of the GTX 870M in this workload. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a complete overhaul in processing capability.

This massive performance gap is reflected in their overall benchmark averages. The GTX 1650 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 11,047, whereas the GTX 870M trails with an average of 9,959. When contextualized against their respective peer groups, the difference becomes clearer. The GTX 1650 SUPER sits at the 50th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 870M is at the 48th percentile. Despite the similar percentile ranking, the absolute scores show the GTX 1650 SUPER is the faster card.

The nearest rivals for each card further illustrate their respective performance tiers. The GTX 1650 SUPER’s closest competitor is the AMD Radeon RX 550, with an average score of 11,075, a minuscule 0.2% difference. It also edges out the NVIDIA GeForce MX350 by 1.5%, which scores 10,883. The GTX 870M’s rivals are of a similar performance class, with the AMD Radeon Pro 5300M scoring 10,013 (0.5% higher) and the NVIDIA Quadro K5100M scoring 10,043 (0.8% higher). In essence, the GTX 1650 SUPER competes in a slightly higher league than the GTX 870M, and its score advantage over its own rivals is consistent with its lead over the older mobile part.

The benchmark results indicate that the GTX 1650 SUPER is not just faster in one specific test but has a higher overall performance ceiling. The GTX 870M’s strengths, if any, are not captured in the head-to-head data, as it fails to secure a single win. The 247.4% delta in the OpenCL test is the single most important metric for comparing these two GPUs, as it dwarfs the differences seen between each card and its own nearest rivals.

Architecture Differences

The performance disparity between these two GPUs is rooted in fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing technologies. The GTX 1650 SUPER is built on the Turing architecture, using the TU116 chip, and fabricated on a 12 nm process at TSMC. In contrast, the GTX 870M is based on the much older Kepler architecture, using the GK104 chip, and is built on a 28 nm process. This process node difference is crucial; the newer 12 nm process allows for significantly higher transistor density. The TU116 chip packs 6,600 million transistors into a 284 mm² die, yielding a density of 23.2M transistors per mm². The GK104 chip, while having a similar die size at 294 mm², contains only 3,540 million transistors, resulting in a density of just 12.0M / mm².

This architectural evolution brings substantial changes to core configuration and features. While the GTX 870M actually has more shading units (1,344) and texture mapping units (112) than the GTX 1650 SUPER (1,280 and 80, respectively), the newer card’s superior architecture and clock speeds more than compensate. The GTX 1650 SUPER operates at a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1725 MHz, compared to the GTX 870M’s much lower 941 MHz base and 967 MHz boost clocks. This clock speed advantage, combined with the architectural efficiency of Turing, leads to the GTX 1650 SUPER's higher fill rates: it achieves 55.20 GPixel/s and 138.0 GTexel/s, versus the GTX 870M’s 27.08 GPixel/s and 108.3 GTexel/s.

Memory technology also marks a clear separation. The GTX 1650 SUPER uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The GTX 870M uses 3 GB of older GDDR5 memory on a wider 192-bit bus, but its bandwidth is only 120.0 GB/s. The GTX 1650 SUPER’s memory runs at an effective speed of 12 Gbps, while the GTX 870M’s runs at 5 Gbps. This gives the newer card a 60% bandwidth advantage, which is critical for modern game textures and compute workloads. The FP32 performance tells a similar story, with the GTX 1650 SUPER delivering 4.416 TFLOPS against the GTX 870M’s 2.599 TFLOPS. The GTX 1650 SUPER also supports FP16 at 8.832 TFLOPS, a feature the GTX 870M lacks entirely.

Feature support further differentiates the two. The GTX 1650 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 870M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the GTX 1650 SUPER has a newer Vulkan version (1.4) compared to the GTX 870M’s 1.2.175. The physical form factors also differ, as the GTX 1650 SUPER is a dual-slot desktop card with a 1x 6-pin power connector and a suggested 300 W PSU, while the GTX 870M is an MXM module with no dedicated power connectors, designed for portable devices.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data shows a clear and overwhelming advantage for the GTX 1650 SUPER in compute performance. The Geekbench OpenCL score of 43,875 versus 12,630 indicates that the GTX 1650 SUPER is the definitive winner for any workload that leverages general-purpose GPU computing. This includes tasks like video encoding, scientific simulation, and machine learning inference, where raw FP32 and FP16 throughput are paramount. The GTX 1650 SUPER’s higher bandwidth and modern architecture make it the obvious choice for these applications.

For gaming, the GTX 1650 SUPER’s higher pixel rate (55.20 GPixel/s vs 27.08 GPixel/s) and texture rate (138.0 GTexel/s vs 108.3 GTexel/s) suggest it will handle modern titles at higher resolutions and detail settings. Its support for DirectX 12 (12_1) also ensures better compatibility and performance in newer games that utilize this API’s advanced features. The GTX 870M, with its older Kepler architecture and lower clocks, will struggle to maintain playable frame rates in demanding modern titles, especially at higher settings. The GTX 1650 SUPER’s 4 GB of GDDR6 memory, while not massive, is more modern and faster than the GTX 870M’s 3 GB of GDDR5, reducing the likelihood of memory bottlenecks.

There is no scenario in the data where the GTX 870M emerges as a winner. Its only advantage lies in its form factor as an MXM module, which makes it suitable for specific laptop upgrades. However, even in this niche, its performance is severely limited. The GTX 870M’s lower power consumption is theoretically a benefit, but both cards share a 100 W TDP, negating this potential advantage. The data indicates that for any desktop use case, the GTX 1650 SUPER is the superior choice. For portable systems, the GTX 870M exists in a legacy ecosystem, but its performance would be a significant bottleneck compared to any modern equivalent.

The Verdict

The data unequivocally points to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER as the superior product. Its 247.4% lead in the OpenCL benchmark is a clear indicator of its massive performance advantage. The architectural differences—Turing on 12 nm versus Kepler on 28 nm—translate directly into higher clocks, better memory bandwidth, and more modern feature support. The GTX 1650 SUPER’s average benchmark score of 11,047 also surpasses the GTX 870M’s 9,959, confirming that its superiority is not limited to a single test.

Users looking for a GPU for a desktop system should unequivocally choose the GTX 1650 SUPER. Its performance in compute and its superior fill rates make it a far more capable option for both gaming and productivity tasks. The GTX 870M is a relic of a bygone era, and its performance is simply not competitive in the current landscape. The only scenario where the GTX 870M might be considered is in a legacy laptop repair or upgrade, where its MXM form factor is a requirement. However, even in that context, its performance would be a significant compromise. For anyone building a new system or upgrading an existing desktop, the GTX 1650 SUPER is the only rational choice based on the available benchmark data.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER than the GTX 870M in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43,875 points, which is 247.4% higher than the GTX 870M’s score of 12,630 points.

Q: What are the key architectural differences between the two GPUs?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER uses the Turing architecture on a 12 nm process with 6,600 million transistors, while the GTX 870M uses the older Kepler architecture on a 28 nm process with 3,540 million transistors.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER has a memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s, compared to the GTX 870M’s 120.0 GB/s.

Q: Does the GTX 870M have any performance advantage over the GTX 1650 SUPER?

A: No. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, the GTX 1650 SUPER wins decisively. The GTX 870M has no benchmark wins in the data.

Q: What is the DirectX support difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 870M supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

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

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER has an average benchmark score of 11,047, while the GTX 870M has an average score of 9,959.