NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost Comparison

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the clear winner in this comparison. Benchmark data shows it outperforms the GTX 650 Ti Boost by a massive margin in every shared test, with the GTX 1650 delivering roughly 3.2x the OpenCL score and 3.3x the Vulkan score. The GTX 650 Ti Boost, despite being older, holds a higher percentile ranking (42nd vs 40th) and a higher average benchmark score (8067 vs 7472), but this is due to different benchmark suites being used for each card. For any modern workload, the GTX 1650 is the only sensible choice.

The Verdict

The GTX 1650 is the definitive pick for virtually any use case. It wins both head-to-head benchmarks decisively: 29,629 vs 9,302 in Geekbench OpenCL (a 68.6% lead) and 33,042 vs 10,041 in Geekbench Vulkan (a 69.6% lead). The GTX 650 Ti Boost cannot compete in raw compute performance, offering only 1.585 TFLOPS FP32 against the GTX 1650's 2.984 TFLOPS. The GTX 1650 also doubles the memory capacity to 4 GB and offers a much higher pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s compared to 16.51 GPixel/s.

The GTX 650 Ti Boost is only relevant for legacy system builds or very specific compatibility needs. Its 2 GB memory and 192-bit bus provide 144.2 GB/s of bandwidth, which is actually higher than the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s over a 128-bit bus. However, that advantage is meaningless given the GTX 1650's far superior core architecture and clock speeds. The GTX 650 Ti Boost also requires a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W PSU, while the GTX 1650 draws power entirely from the PCIe slot with a 250 W PSU recommendation.

Data strongly favors the GTX 1650 for anyone building or upgrading a system today. The GTX 650 Ti Boost is end-of-life, released in 2013, and represents a fundamentally older architecture. The GTX 1650, released in 2019, is also end-of-life but provides a far more capable platform for modern APIs and higher resolutions. The GTX 1650's launch MSRP was 149 USD, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost launched at 169 USD, making the newer card cheaper at launch while being dramatically faster.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1650 wins in every measurable performance category. In compute workloads, its Geekbench OpenCL score of 29,629 crushes the 650 Ti Boost's 9,302. For gaming and graphics APIs, the Vulkan score of 33,042 versus 10,041 shows a similar dominance. The GTX 1650's FP32 throughput of 2.984 TFLOPS is nearly double the 1.585 TFLOPS of the older card, and its texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s far exceeds 66.05 GTexel/s.

The GTX 650 Ti Boost does hold one narrow advantage: memory bandwidth. Its 144.2 GB/s on a 192-bit bus exceeds the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s on a 128-bit bus. This could theoretically help in bandwidth-sensitive scenarios, but the GTX 1650's higher clocks (1,485 MHz base vs 980 MHz) and newer architecture more than compensate. The GTX 650 Ti Boost also has more TMUs (64 vs 56), though the GTX 1650 counters with more ROPs (32 vs 24).

The GTX 1650 wins decisively in power efficiency. Its TDP is 75 W versus 134 W for the 650 Ti Boost, meaning it delivers vastly more performance while consuming 44% less power. The GTX 1650 requires no external power connectors, simplifying installation in any system with a standard PCIe slot. The GTX 650 Ti Boost's requirement for a 6-pin connector and 300 W PSU makes it less flexible for small form factor builds.

Architecture Differences

The two cards represent completely different GPU generations. The GTX 650 Ti Boost uses the GK106 chip on Kepler architecture, built on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 11.5M / mm². The GTX 1650 uses the TU117 chip on Turing architecture, built on a more advanced 12 nm process, also at TSMC. It contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, achieving 23.5M / mm² density — double the transistor density of the older chip.

The GTX 1650 has more shading units (896 vs 768) and more ROPs (32 vs 24), but fewer TMUs (56 vs 64). Clock speeds are dramatically different: the GTX 1650 runs at 1,485 MHz base and 1,665 MHz boost, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost runs at 980 MHz base and 1,032 MHz boost. This clock advantage, combined with the newer architecture, explains the massive performance gap.

Memory configurations also differ significantly. The GTX 1650 offers 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost offers 2 GB on a 192-bit bus. Effective memory speed is 8 Gbps for the GTX 1650 versus 6 Gbps for the older card. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, making the newer card more future-proof for modern games.

The GTX 1650 also supports FP16 compute at 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the GTX 650 Ti Boost has no FP16 capability listed. Display outputs differ too: the GTX 1650 includes HDMI 2.0 and DisplayPort 1.4a, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost has HDMI 1.4a and DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 1650 is physically smaller at 229 mm length versus 241 mm for the older card.

FAQ

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 650 Ti Boost has an average benchmark score of 8,067, which is higher than the GTX 1650's 7,472. However, this is because the two cards were tested with different benchmark suites — the GTX 650 Ti Boost only has Geekbench scores (8,067 average) while the GTX 1650 includes PassMark scores that lower its average.

Q: Does the GTX 650 Ti Boost have any advantage over the GTX 1650?

A: Yes, it has higher memory bandwidth (144.2 GB/s vs 128.1 GB/s) due to a wider 192-bit bus, and more texture mapping units (64 vs 56). It also has a higher percentile ranking (42nd vs 40th among all GPUs), though this is based on different benchmark data.

Q: Which card requires less power from the system?

A: The GTX 1650 has a 75 W TDP and requires no external power connectors, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost has a 134 W TDP and needs a 1x 6-pin connector. The GTX 1650 also has a lower suggested PSU rating of 250 W versus 300 W for the older card.

Q: What are the DirectX and Vulkan support differences?

A: The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 650 Ti Boost supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. This means the GTX 1650 is compatible with newer graphics API features.

Q: How much faster is the GTX 1650 in compute benchmarks?

A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 scores 29,629 versus 9,302 for the GTX 650 Ti Boost — a 68.6% lead. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1650 scores 33,042 versus 10,041 — a 69.6% lead.

Q: Which card has more memory and what's the difference in capacity?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, exactly double the 2 GB found on the GTX 650 Ti Boost. This makes the GTX 1650 significantly better suited for modern games and applications that require larger frame buffers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the GTX 1650's dominance most clearly. It scores 29,629 points compared to the GTX 650 Ti Boost's 9,302 points, a difference of 68.6% in favor of the newer card. This massive gap reflects both the higher clock speeds (1,485 MHz vs 980 MHz base) and the nearly double FP32 throughput (2.984 TFLOPS vs 1.585 TFLOPS).

In Geekbench Vulkan, the results are similarly lopsided. The GTX 1650 achieves 33,042 points while the GTX 650 Ti Boost manages only 10,041 points, a 69.6% lead for the GTX 1650. This benchmark likely benefits from the GTX 1650's superior DirectX 12 (12_1) support and newer Vulkan 1.4 API implementation, compared to the older card's DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175.

The GTX 1650 also shows advantages in raw throughput metrics that aren't head-to-head but are still telling. Its pixel rate of 53.28 GPixel/s is more than triple the GTX 650 Ti Boost's 16.51 GPixel/s. The texture rate of 93.24 GTexel/s is 41% higher than the 66.05 GTexel/s of the older card. These differences compound in real-world gaming, where the GTX 1650 can push significantly more pixels and textures per second.

The only metric where the GTX 650 Ti Boost shows superiority is memory bandwidth. Its 144.2 GB/s is 12.6% higher than the GTX 1650's 128.1 GB/s. However, this advantage is offset by the GTX 1650's higher effective memory speed (8 Gbps vs 6 Gbps) and larger capacity (4 GB vs 2 GB). In practical terms, the GTX 650 Ti Boost's bandwidth edge is insufficient to overcome its massive compute deficit.

Specification Differences

The process node differs substantially: 28 nm for the GTX 650 Ti Boost versus 12 nm for the GTX 1650. Transistor counts follow suit at 2,540 million versus 4,700 million, with die sizes of 221 mm² versus 200 mm². The transistor density more than doubles, from 11.5M / mm² to 23.5M / mm².

Clock speeds show a generational leap. The GTX 650 Ti Boost runs at 980 MHz base and 1,032 MHz boost. The GTX 1650 runs at 1,485 MHz base and 1,665 MHz boost — a 51% higher base clock and 61% higher boost clock. Memory speeds also increase from 1,502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) to 2,001 MHz (8 Gbps effective).

Core configurations differ in every category except shading units. The GTX 650 Ti Boost has 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 24 ROPs. The GTX 1650 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The FP32 performance nearly doubles from 1.585 TFLOPS to 2.984 TFLOPS, and the GTX 1650 adds FP16 support at 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1).

Memory specifications show a trade-off: the GTX 650 Ti Boost has 2 GB on a 192-bit bus with 144.2 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 1650 has 4 GB on a 128-bit bus with 128.1 GB/s bandwidth. Power requirements favor the newer card dramatically: 75 W TDP with no power connectors versus 134 W with a 6-pin connector. The suggested PSU drops from 300 W to 250 W.

Display outputs differ in version support. The GTX 650 Ti Boost offers 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The GTX 1650 offers 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a. Physical dimensions are also slightly different: the GTX 650 Ti Boost measures 241 mm in length, while the GTX 1650 measures 229 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 35 mm in width.