NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 Ti Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060, the mobile Ampere-class GPU for laptops, and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER, a desktop Turing card each returning, both are End-of-life products. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, which is a laptop part, and the GTX 1650 SUPER, a dual-slot desktop unit, show a close overall average scores but with a clear split across different test types. The database records a head-to-head result that is 6 wins for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and 4 wins for the GTX 1650 SUPER. The overall averages put the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile at 12940, slightly above the GTX 1650 SUPER's 11047, but the individual tests reveal that the GTX 1650 SUPER still holds ground in several specific workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile comes in the DirectX 12 3DMark Steel Nomad test, where it scores 469 against the GTX 1650 SUPER's 352, a 33.2% advantage. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the newer architecture handles DX12 workloads with considerably more efficiency. The Geekbench OpenCL test shows a similar pattern: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 57915, while the GTX 1650 SUPER scores 43875, putting the mobile part 32% ahead. These two tests represent the biggest single-workload gaps in the entire comparison.

The Vulkan API results also favor the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, though by a smaller margin. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile records 55812 in Geekbench Vulkan, compared to 50519 for the GTX 1650 SUPER, a 10.5% lead. In the Passmark DirectX 10 test, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile scores 60 versus 50, a 20% win. The DirectX 11 test shows a narrower gap, with the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile at 76 and the GTX 1650 SUPER at 73, a 4.1% difference. The DirectX 12 Passmark test also goes to the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, 49 to 45, an 8.9% advantage.

The GTX 1650 SUPER fights back in several other tests. The most striking is the Passmark DirectX 9 test, where the GTX 1650 SUPER scores 148 against the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 120, a 18.9% win for the older card. This suggests that legacy DX9 titles run significantly better on the Turing architecture. The Passmark G2D test is another clear victory for the GTX 1650 SUPER, with a score of 749 versus 498, a 33.5% margin. This 2D performance gap is the largest in either direction across all recorded tests.

The remaining two tests are close. In Passmark G3D, the GTX 1650 SUPER scores 10179, barely ahead of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 10093, a 0.8% difference. The Passmark GPU Compute test also goes to the GTX 1650 SUPER, 4477 versus 4305, a 3.8% margin. These narrow results indicate that raw rasterization performance is nearly identical between the two, despite the architectural differences.

Architecture Differences

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is built on the GA106 chip, using the Ampere architecture on an 8 nm process from Samsung. It packs 12,000 million transistors on a 276 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The GTX 1650 SUPER uses the TU116 chip, based on the older Turing architecture, manufactured on TSMC's 12 nm process. It contains 6,600 million transistors across a 284 mm² die, for a density of 23.2M per mm². The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile therefore has nearly double the transistor count in a slightly smaller die, a direct result of the denser 8 nm node.

The shading unit count differs substantially. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 2560 shading units, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has 1280, exactly half. Texture mapping units are equal at 80 each, and raster operations units are also equal at 32 each. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile adds 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, neither of which exists on the GTX 1650 SUPER. These features are exclusive to the Ampere architecture and enable hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based workloads that the GTX 1650 SUPER cannot handle.

Clock speeds tell a different story. The GTX 1650 SUPER runs at a base clock of 1530 MHz and a boost clock of 1725 MHz, while the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile runs at 735 MHz base and 1035 MHz boost. Despite the much lower clocks, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile achieves higher FP32 throughput at 5.299 TFLOPS versus 4.416 TFLOPS for the GTX 1650 SUPER, thanks to its doubled shading unit count. The FP16 figures are notable: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile delivers 5.299 TFLOPS at a 1:1 ratio, while the GTX 1650 SUPER delivers 8.832 TFLOPS at a 2:1 ratio. This means the GTX 1650 SUPER is actually faster in FP16 compute, a legacy of Turing's dedicated FP16 path.

The pixel and texture rates also favor the GTX 1650 SUPER. It achieves 55.20 GPixel/s pixel rate and 138.0 GTexel/s texture rate, compared to 33.12 GPixel/s and 82.80 GTexel/s for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile. These are direct consequences of the higher clock speeds, as both cards have the same number of ROPs and TMUs.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile wins in modern API workloads. Its DirectX 12 performance, as shown in the 3DMark Steel Nomad test, is 33.2% ahead, and its OpenCL compute is 32% ahead. For users running DX12 titles or general-purpose GPU compute through OpenCL, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the clear choice. The ray tracing and tensor cores also open up workloads that are entirely unavailable on the GTX 1650 SUPER, such as ray-traced effects and DLSS-style upscaling, though the database does not record specific scores for those features.

The GTX 1650 SUPER wins in legacy and 2D performance. The DirectX 9 test shows an 18.9% advantage, and the G2D test shows a 33.5% advantage. This makes it a better option for older games that rely on DX9 rendering paths, as well as for systems where 2D desktop compositing or 2D application performance matters. The GTX 1650 SUPER also edges out the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile in the G3D and GPU compute Passmark tests, by 0.8% and 3.8% respectively, suggesting that its higher clocks compensate for the lower core count in certain rasterization-heavy scenarios.

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also wins in Vulkan, with a 10.5% lead, and in DirectX 10 and DirectX 11, with 20% and 4.1% leads respectively. Its DirectX 12 Passmark score is 8.9% higher. The overall pattern is that the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile dominates everything from DX10 onward, while the GTX 1650 SUPER retains an edge only in DX9 and 2D performance.

Specification Differences

Memory configuration is identical: both cards have 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1500 MHz memory clock, which translates to 12 Gbps effective. The power situation differs sharply. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has a TDP of 75 W, is an IGP form factor with no power connectors, and requires no suggested PSU. The GTX 1650 SUPER has a 100 W TDP, is dual-slot, needs a 1x 6-pin power connector, and requires a 300 W PSU.

The bus interface also differs. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the GTX 1650 SUPER uses PCIe 3.0 x16. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has display outputs listed as "Portable Device Dependent," while the GTX 1650 SUPER has 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. The GTX 1650 SUPER has physical dimensions of 229 mm length, 111 mm height, and 35 mm width, while the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its mobile IGP nature.

The API support shows a key difference: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 1650 SUPER supports DirectX 12 (12_1). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The release dates differ, with the GTX 1650 SUPER launching on 2019-11-21 and the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile launching on 2021-05-10. The GTX 1650 SUPER has a launch MSRP of 159 USD, while the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has no recorded launch MSRP. The GTX 1650 SUPER also has a listed predecessor (GeForce 10) and successor (GeForce 20), while the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile lists only a predecessor (GeForce 20 Mobile).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute throughput in FP32?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile achieves 5.299 TFLOPS in FP32, while the GTX 1650 SUPER achieves 4.416 TFLOPS.

Q: Do both cards support ray tracing?

A: No. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has none of either.

Q: What is the memory configuration on each card?

A: Both cards have 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth and 1500 MHz memory clock.

Q: Which card has better DirectX 9 performance?

A: The GTX 1650 SUPER, which scores 148 in the Passmark DirectX 9 test, 18.9% ahead of the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's 120.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile has a 75 W TDP with no power connectors, while the GTX 1650 SUPER has a 100 W TDP, requires a 1x 6-pin connector, and needs a 300 W PSU.

Q: Which card has higher Vulkan performance?

A: The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile, scoring 55812 in Geekbench Vulkan, 10.5% ahead of the GTX 1650 SUPER's 50519.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on workload type. For users running modern DirectX 12 titles, OpenCL compute, or Vulkan applications, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the stronger part. Its 33.2% lead in 3DMark Steel Nomad and 32% lead in OpenCL are decisive, and its DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it is ready for the latest rendering features. The ray tracing and tensor cores add capabilities that the GTX 1650 SUPER simply cannot offer.

For users whose workloads lean on older APIs or 2D performance, the GTX 1650 SUPER remains competitive. Its 18.9% advantage in DirectX 9 and 33.5% advantage in G2D are notable, and its higher clock speeds give it an edge in pixel and texture fill rates, 55.20 GPixel/s and 138.0 GTexel/s versus 33.12 GPixel/s and 82.80 GTexel/s. The GTX 1650 SUPER also wins the close G3D and GPU compute tests, though by margins under 4%.

The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile also carries a major efficiency advantage, with a 75 W TDP versus 100 W, no power connector requirement, and a smaller form factor as an IGP. The GTX 1650 SUPER needs a 6-pin connector and a 300 W PSU, making it a heavier system integration burden. The RTX 3050 Ti Mobile's PCIe 4.0 x16 interface also offers greater bandwidth headroom than the GTX 1650 SUPER's PCIe 3.0 x16.

In terms of overall average benchmark score, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile sits at 12940, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, with its nearest rival being the AMD Radeon RX 580 at 12928, a 0.1% difference. The GTX 1650 SUPER has an average of 11047, in the 50th percentile, with its nearest rival the AMD Radeon RX 550 at 11075, a 0.2% difference. The database records the head-to-head as 6 wins for the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile and 4 for the GTX 1650 SUPER.

The verdict is straightforward: the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the better choice for modern gaming and compute, while the GTX 1650 SUPER retains a niche for legacy DX9 and 2D-heavy workloads. Given the overall benchmark averages, the API support differences, and the power efficiency, the RTX 3050 Ti Mobile is the stronger all-around product. The GTX 1650 SUPER is only preferable when specific legacy workloads dominate the usage pattern.