GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs TITAN Xp

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared TITAN Xp with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

TITAN Xp
2017
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
48.51
+201%

TITAN Xp outperforms GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q by a whopping 201% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking65336
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation12.61no data
Power efficiency13.9323.14
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP102TU117
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date6 April 2017 (7 years ago)2 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

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 cores38401024
Core clock speed1405 MHz1035 MHz
Boost clock speed1582 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate379.776.80
Floating-point processing power12.15 TFLOPS2.458 TFLOPS
ROPs9632
TMUs24064

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeGDDR5XGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount12 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1426 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth547.6 GB/s160.0 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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
CUDA6.17.5

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.

TITAN Xp 48.51
+201%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 16.12

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.

TITAN Xp 19424
+201%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 6457

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 HD160−170
+186%
56
−186%
1440p100−110
+178%
36
−178%
4K70−75
+192%
24
−192%

Cost per frame, $

1080p7.49no data
1440p11.99no data
4K17.13no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 17
+0%
17
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 77
+0%
77
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 56
+0%
56
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 63
+0%
63
+0%
Valorant 91
+0%
91
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+0%
13
+0%
Dota 2 82
+0%
82
+0%
Far Cry 5 67
+0%
67
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+0%
62
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 67
+0%
67
+0%
Metro Exodus 38
+0%
38
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 42
+0%
42
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
+0%
11
+0%
Dota 2 106
+0%
106
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 54
+0%
54
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
+0%
26
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35
+0%
35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 25
+0%
25
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+0%
25
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21
+0%
21
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how TITAN Xp and GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • TITAN Xp is 186% faster in 1080p
  • TITAN Xp is 178% faster in 1440p
  • TITAN Xp is 192% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 48.51 16.12
Recency 6 April 2017 2 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 12 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 50 Watt

TITAN Xp has a 200.9% higher aggregate performance score, and a 200% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The TITAN Xp is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that TITAN Xp is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q is a notebook one.

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 TITAN Xp
TITAN Xp
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q

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.


2.1 4678 votes

Rate TITAN Xp on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 215 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about TITAN Xp or GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.