GeForce GTX 1650 vs GTS 450 Rev. 2

GT 545 GT 545 OEM GTS 450 Rev. 2 GTS 450 Rev. 3 GTX 550 Ti
VS
GTX 1650 GTX 1650 GDDR6 GTX 1650 SUPER GTX 1650 TU106 GTX 1650 TU116

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 and GeForce GTX 1650, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTS 450 Rev. 2
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 106 Watt
4.25

GTX 1650 outperforms GTS 450 Rev. 2 by a whopping 363% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTS 450 Rev. 2 GTS 450 Rev. 2
GTX 1650 GTX 1650

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking676279
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data37.22
Power efficiency2.8718.83
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF116TU117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date15 March 2011 (13 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores192896
Core clock speed783 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)106 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate25.0693.24
Floating-point processing power0.6013 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs3256

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length210 mm229 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed902 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.73 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI++

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA2.17.5

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD14−16
−386%
68
+386%
1440p8−9
−400%
40
+400%
4K4−5
−475%
23
+475%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.19
1440pno data3.73
4Kno data6.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 66
+0%
66
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 94
+0%
94
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
Metro Exodus 68
+0%
68
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 77
+0%
77
+0%
Valorant 85
+0%
85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75
+0%
75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+0%
14
+0%
Dota 2 84
+0%
84
+0%
Far Cry 5 99
+0%
99
+0%
Fortnite 82
+0%
82
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 74
+0%
74
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 75
+0%
75
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Valorant 46
+0%
46
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Dota 2 92
+0%
92
+0%
Far Cry 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 61
+0%
61
+0%
Valorant 70
+0%
70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+0%
17
+0%
World of Tanks 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
+0%
7
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 42
+0%
42
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 40
+0%
40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
+0%
29
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+0%
29
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+0%
3
+0%
Dota 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21
+0%
21
+0%

This is how GTS 450 Rev. 2 and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 386% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 400% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 is 475% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 4.25 19.68
Recency 15 March 2011 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 106 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 1650 has a 363.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 41.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTS 450 Rev. 2 GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
ATI HD 5770 Radeon HD 5770
GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650
vs
GTX 780 GeForce GTX 780
GTS 450 Rev. 2 GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
HD 7750 Radeon HD 7750
GTX 560 NVIDIA GTX 560
vs
HD 7410M 7410M
GT 545 NVIDIA GT 545
vs
RTX 4070 4070
GT 520 NVIDIA GT 520
vs
NVS 290 290
GT 520 NVIDIA GT 520
vs
RTX A2000 12 GB 12 GB
GTS 450 Rev. 2 NVIDIA GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
ATI HD 5770 Mac Edition 5770 Mac Edition
GTS 450 Rev. 2 NVIDIA GTS 450 Rev. 2
vs
RTX 4050 Max-Q 4050 Max-Q
9300 GS Rev. 2 GeForce 9300 GS Rev. 2
vs
RTX 5880 Ada Generation 5880 Ada Generation
GT 440 NVIDIA GT 440
vs
P106-100 100
GT 440 NVIDIA GT 440
vs
Vega 3 Embedded 3 Embedded
GT 440 NVIDIA GT 440
vs
Vega 3 Efficient 3 Efficient

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.2 39 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 24630 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 or GeForce GTX 1650, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.