NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 are both end-of-life graphics cards from NVIDIA, but they represent very different eras of GPU design. The GTX 1650 is built on the Turing architecture and the 12 nm process, while the GTX 750 is a Maxwell-based card on the older 28 nm node. Benchmark data shows a clear generational gap: in the two shared head-to-head tests, the GTX 1650 wins both, with a 218.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL and a 309% lead in Geekbench Vulkan. This analysis breaks down where each card excels, the architectural reasons for the performance split, and which user should consider which card based strictly on the recorded figures.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous regarding which card dominates in raw compute and modern API performance. The GTX 1650 wins both head-to-head benchmark tests, and these are not marginal victories. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 scores 29,629 points against the GTX 750's 9,315 points, a delta of 218.1%. In Geekbench Vulkan, the margin is even wider: 33,042 points versus 8,078 points, a 309% difference. The GTX 750 has no wins in the head-to-head comparison, with a 0-2 record.

Looking at the broader benchmark suite, the GTX 1650 has a much more extensive set of recorded scores. It shows strength across DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 tests, with scores of 124, 39, 58, and 35 respectively on Passmark. Its Passmark G3D score is 7,880, and its average benchmark score is 7,472. The GTX 750, by contrast, only has three recorded benchmarks in the pack (Geekbench Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan), all of which are significantly lower than the GTX 1650's corresponding results where comparable. The GTX 750's strongest recorded result is its Geekbench OpenCL score of 9,315, which is less than one-third of the GTX 1650's score in the same test.

The percentile ranking for both cards is identical at 40, meaning both sit at the 40th percentile of all GPUs tracked. However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story: the GTX 1650 averages 7,472, while the GTX 750 averages 7,222. The GTX 1650's nearest rivals include the Intel Arc A310 (average score 7,550, delta of -1%) and the AMD Radeon HD 8850M (average score 7,447, delta of 0.3%). The GTX 750's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon Vega 8 Mobile (average score 7,203, delta of 0.3%) and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 (average score 7,157, delta of 0.9%). This placement shows that while both cards occupy a similar percentile, the GTX 1650 is competing in a higher absolute score tier.

For use-case differentiation, the GTX 1650 is the clear choice for any workload that leverages Vulkan or OpenCL compute, given the massive deltas. The GTX 750's only unique benchmark in the pack is Geekbench Metal, where it scores 4,274; the GTX 1650 has no Metal score recorded, so no comparison is possible there. In practical terms, the GTX 1650 wins on all comparable compute and graphics API tests, while the GTX 750 has no recorded wins in any shared test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is stark and explains the benchmark disparities. The GTX 1650 uses the TU117 chip built on TSMC's 12 nm process, while the GTX 750 uses the GM107 chip on TSMC's 28 nm process. This node difference is critical: the GTX 1650 packs 4,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². The GTX 750 has 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a density of only 12.6M per mm². The newer node allows nearly 2.5 times the transistor count in only 35% more die area.

The compute resources are significantly higher on the GTX 1650. It features 896 shading units, 56 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 32 raster operations pipelines (ROPs). The GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This means the GTX 1650 has 75% more shading units, 75% more TMUs, and double the ROPs. Clock speeds also favor the newer card: the GTX 1650 runs at a base of 1,485 MHz and boosts to 1,665 MHz, while the GTX 750 runs at 1,020 MHz base and 1,085 MHz boost. The combination of more cores and higher clocks produces the observed performance gap.

Memory configurations differ as well. The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus, providing 128.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 750 has only 1,024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 on the same 128-bit bus, but its memory clock of 1,253 MHz yields just 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 1650's memory runs at 2,001 MHz (8 Gbps effective), which is a substantial increase. The GTX 1650 also has a higher pixel rate (53.28 GPixel/s vs 17.36 GPixel/s) and texture rate (93.24 GTexel/s vs 34.72 GTexel/s). Floating-point performance is 2.984 TFLOPS for the GTX 1650 versus 1,111.0 GFLOPS for the GTX 750; the GTX 1650 also supports FP16 at 5.967 TFLOPS (2:1 ratio), while the GTX 750 has no FP16 data.

The APIs supported are another differentiator. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 750 only supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 1650 is part of the GeForce 16 generation with a Turing architecture, succeeding the GeForce 10 series and preceding GeForce 20. The GTX 750 is from the GeForce 700 generation with Maxwell architecture, succeeding GeForce 600 and preceding GeForce 900. The GTX 1650 has no power connector and a dual-slot design, while the GTX 750 also has no power connector but is a single-slot card. The GTX 1650 is longer at 229 mm versus 145 mm for the GTX 750, and it uses a DisplayPort 1.4a output, while the GTX 750 uses mini-HDMI 1.4a.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the GTX 1650 is the superior card in every measurable comparison available. It wins both head-to-head tests by margins of 218.1% and 309%, and it has a higher average benchmark score (7,472 vs 7,222). The GTX 1650's percentile ranking is equal to the GTX 750's at 40, but this is likely due to the broader field of GPUs tracked, not an indication of equal performance. The data shows the GTX 1650 is nearly three times faster in OpenCL and over four times faster in Vulkan than the GTX 750.

For a user choosing between these two, the GTX 1650 is the only rational pick for any modern workload involving compute or Vulkan-based graphics. The GTX 750's sole redeeming feature in the data is its lower power draw at 55 W TDP versus 75 W for the GTX 1650, and its smaller single-slot form factor. However, neither card is suitable for demanding modern games, given the GTX 1650's 4 GB memory limit and the GTX 750's 1 GB memory. The GTX 1650 also has a higher launch MSRP of 149 USD versus 119 USD for the GTX 750, but that price difference is justified by the performance delta. The GTX 750 should only be considered if the single-slot, lower-power form factor is an absolute requirement, and even then, its performance is severely limited by its 1 GB memory and lower bandwidth.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in Geekbench Vulkan?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is faster, scoring 33,042 points versus the GTX 750's 8,078 points, a delta of 309%.

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

A: The GTX 1650 has an average benchmark score of 7,472, while the GTX 750 has an average of 7,222.

Q: Do both cards support Vulkan 1.4?

A: Yes, both the GTX 1650 and the GTX 750 support Vulkan 1.4 and OpenGL 4.6.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, while the GTX 750 has 1,024 MB (1 GB) of GDDR5 memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two cards?

A: The GTX 1650 has a TDP of 75 W, while the GTX 750 has a lower TDP of 55 W.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The GTX 1650 has 4,700 million transistors, compared to the GTX 750's 1,870 million transistors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive data point is the Geekbench Vulkan result. The GTX 1650 scores 33,042, which is 4.09 times the GTX 750's score of 8,078. This 309% delta is the largest margin in any shared test. The GTX 1650's Vulkan score is also its highest recorded benchmark overall, indicating strong driver optimization and hardware support for the API. The GTX 750's Vulkan score of 8,078 is its second-lowest recorded result, only above its Metal score.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1650 again wins decisively with 29,629 points against 9,315 points for the GTX 750, a 218.1% delta. This test measures general-purpose compute performance, and the GTX 1650's higher shading unit count, faster clocks, and larger memory bandwidth all contribute. The GTX 1650's OpenCL score is higher than its average benchmark score, suggesting compute-heavy workloads are a relative strength. The GTX 750's OpenCL score is its best recorded result, but it still falls far short of the GTX 1650.

Beyond the head-to-head tests, the GTX 1650 has a broader suite of Passmark scores that the GTX 750 lacks entirely. The GTX 1650's Passmark G3D score is 7,880, which is above its average. Its DirectX 9 score of 124 is the strongest among its DirectX tests, while DirectX 10 (39), DirectX 11 (58), and DirectX 12 (35) are lower. The GTX 750's only unique benchmark is Geekbench Metal (4,274), which has no corresponding GTX 1650 result. The data clearly shows that the GTX 1650 is not just faster, but also more thoroughly benchmarked, indicating a wider range of supported and tested workloads.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every specification category. The GTX 1650 uses a TU117 chip on a 12 nm process, while the GTX 750 uses a GM107 chip on a 28 nm process. Transistor count is 4,700 million versus 1,870 million, and die size is 200 mm² versus 148 mm². The GTX 1650 has a transistor density of 23.5M per mm², almost double the GTX 750's 12.6M per mm².

Core configuration differences are significant: the GTX 1650 has 896 shading units, 56 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the GTX 750 has 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Clock speeds are higher on the GTX 1650 (1,485 MHz base, 1,665 MHz boost) than on the GTX 750 (1,020 MHz base, 1,085 MHz boost). Memory is 4 GB GDDR5 at 2,001 MHz (8 Gbps effective) for the GTX 1650, versus 1,024 MB GDDR5 at 1,253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) for the GTX 750. Bandwidth is 128.1 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s. The GTX 1650 has higher pixel rate (53.28 GPixel/s vs 17.36 GPixel/s), texture rate (93.24 GTexel/s vs 34.72 GTexel/s), and FP32 performance (2.984 TFLOPS vs 1,111.0 GFLOPS). The GTX 1650 also offers FP16 at 5.967 TFLOPS, which the GTX 750 does not.

Physical and power characteristics differ as well. The GTX 1650 has a 75 W TDP and is dual-slot, while the GTX 750 has a 55 W TDP and is single-slot. Both have no power connectors and a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 1650 is 229 mm long, while the GTX 750 is 145 mm long. Display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the GTX 1650, versus 2x DVI and 1x mini-HDMI 1.4a for the GTX 750. The GTX 1650 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 750 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 1650 was released later (2019-04-22) than the GTX 750 (2014-02-17), and its launch MSRP was 149 USD versus 119 USD for the GTX 750.