RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs GeForce GTX 1650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 with RTX 2000 Ada Generation, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
20.48

RTX 2000 Ada Generation outperforms GTX 1650 by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking27276
Place by popularity3not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation37.7884.16
Power efficiency18.8044.60
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameTU117AD107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has 123% better value for money than GTX 1650.

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 cores8962816
Core clock speed1485 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speed1665 MHz2130 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate93.24187.4
Floating-point processing power2.984 TFLOPS12 TFLOPS
ROPs3248
TMUs5688
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length229 mm168 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth128.0 GB/s256.0 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.56.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA7.58.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1650 20.48
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 45.35
+121%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1650 7875
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 17435
+121%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 1650 39154
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 86172
+120%

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 1650 35853
RTX 2000 Ada Generation 81859
+128%

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 HD69
−117%
150−160
+117%
1440p40
−113%
85−90
+113%
4K23
−117%
50−55
+117%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.16
+100%
4.33
−100%
1440p3.73
+105%
7.64
−105%
4K6.48
+100%
12.98
−100%
  • GTX 1650 has 100% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 has 105% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 has 100% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−116%
80−85
+116%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
−120%
90−95
+120%
Elden Ring 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 66
−112%
140−150
+112%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−116%
80−85
+116%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
−106%
35−40
+106%
Forza Horizon 4 94
−113%
200−210
+113%
Metro Exodus 66
−112%
140−150
+112%
Red Dead Redemption 2 77
−121%
170−180
+121%
Valorant 85
−112%
180−190
+112%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75
−113%
160−170
+113%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−116%
80−85
+116%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
−114%
30−33
+114%
Dota 2 82
−120%
180−190
+120%
Elden Ring 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%
Far Cry 5 90
−111%
190−200
+111%
Fortnite 82
−120%
180−190
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 74
−116%
160−170
+116%
Grand Theft Auto V 75
−113%
160−170
+113%
Metro Exodus 44
−116%
95−100
+116%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
−119%
300−310
+119%
Red Dead Redemption 2 28
−114%
60−65
+114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 65−70
−115%
140−150
+115%
Valorant 46
−117%
100−105
+117%
World of Tanks 230−240
−113%
500−550
+113%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55
−118%
120−130
+118%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
−116%
80−85
+116%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
−100%
24−27
+100%
Dota 2 92
−117%
200−210
+117%
Far Cry 5 65−70
−121%
150−160
+121%
Forza Horizon 4 62
−110%
130−140
+110%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 61
−113%
130−140
+113%
Valorant 70
−114%
150−160
+114%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 30−35
−119%
70−75
+119%
Elden Ring 30−35
−121%
75−80
+121%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−112%
70−75
+112%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
−103%
350−400
+103%
Red Dead Redemption 2 17
−106%
35−40
+106%
World of Tanks 130−140
−116%
300−310
+116%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 38
−111%
80−85
+111%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−100%
14−16
+100%
Far Cry 5 55−60
−114%
120−130
+114%
Forza Horizon 4 45
−111%
95−100
+111%
Metro Exodus 41
−120%
90−95
+120%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
−114%
60−65
+114%
Valorant 40
−113%
85−90
+113%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Dota 2 29
−107%
60−65
+107%
Elden Ring 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Grand Theft Auto V 29
−107%
60−65
+107%
Metro Exodus 12
−100%
24−27
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
−110%
130−140
+110%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−108%
27−30
+108%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
−107%
60−65
+107%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18
−94.4%
35−40
+94.4%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−106%
35−40
+106%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
−100%
6−7
+100%
Dota 2 59
−120%
130−140
+120%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−112%
55−60
+112%
Fortnite 24−27
−120%
55−60
+120%
Forza Horizon 4 26
−112%
55−60
+112%
Valorant 21
−114%
45−50
+114%

This is how GTX 1650 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 117% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 113% faster in 1440p
  • RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 117% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.48 45.35
Recency 23 April 2019 12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 12 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 70 Watt

RTX 2000 Ada Generation has a 121.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 140% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


3.8 24327 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 29 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.