GeForce GTX 1650 vs Tegra 4
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 285 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 3 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 34.60 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 18.65 |
| Architecture | VLIW Vec4 (2010−2013) | Turing (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Tegra 4 | TU117 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 August 2013 (11 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.
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 cores | no data | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 672 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1665 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 11 million | 4,700 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.688 | 93.24 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 32 |
| TMUs | 4 | 56 |
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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 229 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 type | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 128.0 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | N/A | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | ES 3.0 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 7.5 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 August 2013 | 23 April 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 75 Watt |
Tegra 4 has 275% lower power consumption.
GTX 1650, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Tegra 4 and GeForce GTX 1650. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Tegra 4 is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
