NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 SE

The data shows a generational chasm between these two end-of-life NVIDIA cards. The GTX 1650, built on Turing, outperforms the Fermi-based GTX 560 SE decisively in the only shared benchmark, leading by 313.2% in Geekbench OpenCL. While the GTX 560 SE holds a slightly higher overall GPU percentile rank (39th vs 40th for the GTX 1650, where a higher percentile is better), this is based on a single test for the older card and a broader suite for the newer one. The GTX 1650 is the clear choice for any modern workload, while the GTX 560 SE is only relevant as a legacy artifact.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is the only sensible purchase for anyone building or upgrading a system today. Its average benchmark score of 7472 across ten tests, including DirectX 12 and Vulkan, demonstrates functional capability in modern APIs. The GTX 560 SE, with an average score of 7171 from a single OpenCL test, cannot meaningfully compete. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 and GTX 750, with deltaPct values of 0.2% and -0.7% respectively, showing it sits in a performance class roughly equivalent to those older cards. The GTX 1650’s nearest rivals, such as the Intel Arc A310 (-1% deltaPct) and AMD Radeon R7 350 (0.6% deltaPct), indicate it occupies a similar tier but with modern feature support. For anyone needing a card that can handle DirectX 12 titles, the GTX 1650 is the only valid option here. The GTX 560 SE should be considered only for vintage system restoration or testing legacy software, where its PCIe 2.0 interface and 1 GB memory might be adequate.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is stark. The GTX 1650 uses the TU117 chip on a 12 nm process from TSMC, packing 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die. The GTX 560 SE uses the GF114 chip on a 40 nm process, also from TSMC, with just 1,950 million transistors on a much larger 332 mm² die. This results in a transistor density of 23.5M per mm² for the GTX 1650 versus 5.9M per mm² for the GTX 560 SE. The GTX 1650 features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 560 SE has 288 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the GTX 560 SE supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and no Vulkan. The GTX 1650’s memory runs at 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 957 MHz (3.8 Gbps effective) on the GTX 560 SE. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores. The GTX 1650’s pixel rate is 53.28 GPixel/s and texture rate is 93.24 GTexel/s, dwarfing the GTX 560 SE’s 8.832 GPixel/s and 35.33 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is 2.984 TFLOPS for the GTX 1650 versus 847.9 GFLOPS for the GTX 560 SE. The GTX 1650 also supports FP16 at 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1), which the GTX 560 SE lacks entirely.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison available is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 1650 scores 29629 against 7171 for the GTX 560 SE. This translates to a 313.2% lead for the GTX 1650. In practical terms, the GTX 1650 is roughly four times faster in this compute-oriented workload. This single result is consistent with the underlying specifications: the GTX 1650 has 3.5 times the FP32 throughput, 2.6 times the texture fill rate, and 6 times the pixel fill rate. The GTX 560 SE has no other benchmark results in the data, so its performance in DirectX 9, 10, 11, or 12 cannot be quantified here. However, given its 39th percentile rank versus the GTX 1650’s 40th, the GTX 560 SE is not catastrophically behind in aggregate performance—but that rank is derived from limited data. The GTX 1650’s wins in this head-to-head are total; it wins 1 test, while the GTX 560 SE wins 0.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. Process node: 12 nm (GTX 1650) versus 40 nm (GTX 560 SE). Transistor count: 4,700 million versus 1,950 million. Die size: 200 mm² versus 332 mm². Transistor density: 23.5M / mm² versus 5.9M / mm². Base and boost clocks exist for the GTX 1650 (1485 MHz base, 1665 MHz boost) but are null for the GTX 560 SE. Memory clock: 2001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) versus 957 MHz (3.8 Gbps effective). Memory size: 4 GB versus 1024 MB. Memory bus width: 128 bit versus 192 bit. Memory bandwidth: 128.1 GB/s versus 91.87 GB/s. Shading units: 896 versus 288. TMUs: 56 versus 48. ROPs: 32 versus 24. Pixel rate: 53.28 GPixel/s versus 8.832 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 93.24 GTexel/s versus 35.33 GTexel/s. FP32: 2.984 TFLOPS versus 847.9 GFLOPS. FP16: 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1) versus null. TDP: 75 W versus 150 W. Power connectors: None versus 2x 6-pin. Suggested PSU: 250 W versus 450 W. Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 versus PCIe 2.0 x16. Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a versus 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI 1.3a. DirectX support: 12 (12_1) versus 12 (11_0). Vulkan support: 1.4 versus null. Dimensions: 229 mm length, 111 mm height, 35 mm width versus 210 mm length with no height or width data. Release date: 2019-04-22 versus 2012-02-19. The GTX 1650 has a launch MSRP of 149 USD; the GTX 560 SE has no listed MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in compute workloads?

A: The GTX 1650 is 313.2% faster than the GTX 560 SE in the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark, scoring 29629 versus 7171.

Q: Does the GTX 560 SE support Vulkan?

A: No. The data lists Vulkan as null for the GTX 560 SE, while the GTX 1650 supports Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How much memory do these cards have?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 560 SE has 1024 MB of GDDR5 memory on a 192-bit bus with 91.87 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 1650 has a TDP of 75 W, requires no power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 560 SE has a TDP of 150 W, requires 2x 6-pin power connectors, and a suggested PSU of 450 W.

Q: Which card has a higher overall GPU percentile rank?

A: The GTX 560 SE ranks in the 39th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 1650 ranks in the 40th percentile. A higher percentile indicates better performance relative to other GPUs, so the GTX 560 SE is marginally higher despite being much older.

Q: Can the GTX 560 SE run DirectX 12 games?

A: Yes, it supports DirectX 12 (11_0), but this is an older feature level compared to the GTX 1650’s DirectX 12 (12_1). The GTX 1650 also supports newer APIs like Vulkan 1.4.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1650 wins in every measurable category. It dominates in raw compute, with 2.984 TFLOPS FP32 versus 847.9 GFLOPS, making it suitable for modern rendering and compute tasks. Its 4 GB memory capacity and 128.1 GB/s bandwidth allow it to handle modern game textures and resolutions, while the GTX 560 SE’s 1024 MB and 91.87 GB/s will bottleneck on any current title. The GTX 1650’s support for Vulkan 1.4 and DirectX 12 (12_1) means it can run contemporary games and applications, whereas the GTX 560 SE’s lack of Vulkan and older DirectX feature level limits it to legacy software. The GTX 1650 is also far more power-efficient, with a 75 W TDP and no power connectors, versus the GTX 560 SE’s 150 W TDP and 2x 6-pin requirement, making it suitable for small form factor or low-power builds. The GTX 560 SE’s only potential advantage is its 192-bit memory bus, which provides a wider path for data, but this is offset by its much lower clock speed and bandwidth. In practical terms, the GTX 1650 wins for gaming, content creation, and any modern workload. The GTX 560 SE wins only in the narrow case of running software from its 2012 era, where its PCIe 2.0 interface and older display outputs (2x DVI, mini-HDMI 1.3a) might match vintage monitors. For any current use case, the GTX 1650 is unequivocally the superior card.