GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs GTX 980M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980M and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 980M
2014
8 GB GDDR5
19.06

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile outperforms GTX 980M by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking286268
Place by popularitynot in top-10084
Power efficiency13.7529.15
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM204TU116
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 October 2014 (10 years ago)23 April 2020 (4 years ago)

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 cores15361024
Core clock speed1038 MHz1350 MHz
Boost clock speed1127 MHz1485 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown50 Watt
Texture fill rate51.8495.04
Floating-point processing power1.659 TFLOPS3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs9664

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).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options+-

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 amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth160 GB/s192.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.140
CUDA+7.5

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 980M 19.06
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 20.20
+6%

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 980M 7355
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+6%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GTX 980M 31944
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 43517
+36.2%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 980M 12517
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 13266
+6%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 980M 9682
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 9930
+2.6%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 980M 65241
+0.1%
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 65163

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

GTX 980M 327632
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 410191
+25.2%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 980M 2805
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 3618
+29%

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:

900p173
−4%
180−190
+4%
Full HD69
+19%
58
−19%
1440p31
−38.7%
43
+38.7%
4K27
+0%
27
+0%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−96.7%
59
+96.7%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 51
−19.6%
61
+19.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
−53.1%
49
+53.1%
Battlefield 5 67
+1.5%
65−70
−1.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−39.5%
53
+39.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−53.3%
46
+53.3%
Far Cry 5 62
−11.3%
69
+11.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 59
−42.4%
84
+42.4%
Forza Horizon 4 196
+58.1%
120−130
−58.1%
Hitman 3 35−40
−37.8%
51
+37.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−96.7%
181
+96.7%
Metro Exodus 65
−40%
91
+40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+15.9%
44
−15.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100
+49.3%
65−70
−49.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−126%
201
+126%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 68
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+0%
32
+0%
Battlefield 5 57
−15.8%
65−70
+15.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−23.7%
47
+23.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−20%
36
+20%
Far Cry 5 52
−11.5%
58
+11.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 47
−25.5%
59
+25.5%
Forza Horizon 4 191
+54%
120−130
−54%
Hitman 3 35−40
−35.1%
50
+35.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
−95.7%
180
+95.7%
Metro Exodus 55
−43.6%
79
+43.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+30.8%
39
−30.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
−19%
75
+19%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 121
+169%
45−50
−169%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
−106%
183
+106%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
−3.8%
27
+3.8%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−35
+113%
15
−113%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+22.6%
31
−22.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
−13.3%
34
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 38
−2.6%
39
+2.6%
Forza Horizon 4 47
−164%
120−130
+164%
Hitman 3 35−40
−16.2%
43
+16.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+43.8%
64
−43.8%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60−65
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
−18.2%
39
+18.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+305%
22
−305%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55
+24.4%
41
−24.4%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 33
−18.2%
35−40
+18.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 32
−18.8%
38
+18.8%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20
−5%
21−24
+5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
−4.8%
21−24
+4.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
−45.5%
16
+45.5%
Far Cry 5 24
−8.3%
26
+8.3%
Forza Horizon 4 134
+18.6%
110−120
−18.6%
Hitman 3 21−24
−27.3%
28
+27.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Metro Exodus 38
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
−7.9%
40−45
+7.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
−4.5%
21−24
+4.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
−6.2%
120
+6.2%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
−6.5%
30−35
+6.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16
−25%
20−22
+25%
Far Cry New Dawn 17
−17.6%
20
+17.6%
Hitman 3 14−16
−14.3%
16
+14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100
+133%
42
−133%
Metro Exodus 18
−22.2%
21−24
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
−13.6%
25
+13.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−50%
6
+50%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 26
−7.7%
27−30
+7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−9.5%
21−24
+9.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−5.9%
18−20
+5.9%

This is how GTX 980M and GTX 1650 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 4% faster in 900p
  • GTX 980M is 19% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 39% faster in 1440p
  • A tie in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 980M is 305% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 164% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 980M is ahead in 15 tests (21%)
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is ahead in 52 tests (72%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.06 20.20
Recency 7 October 2014 23 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

GTX 980M has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 980M and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile.


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 980M
GeForce GTX 980M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.2 333 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1600 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 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.