GeForce GTX 1050 vs GeForce GTX 1650: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
Compare with AIRendering and compute
B +164.4%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 leads in this scenario (up to 164.4% in comparable benchmarks).
No comparable benchmarks yet: gaming: rasterization, gaming: ray tracing, power efficiency.
Advantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce GTX 1050 is better1
Launch price $40 lower$109 vs $149
Where GeForce GTX 1650 is better2
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 99.8% lower134 s vs 269 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 144.3% faster424 samples/min vs 174 samples/min
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- B ahead by 99.8%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1050268.6 sGeForce GTX 1650134.4 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
B · 134A · 2690100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is ahead by 99.8% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050
268.6 s · community measurement, sample 28 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 28 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 244.17–271.98; submissions 2021-08-01 to 2022-02-28; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
134.4 s · community measurement, sample 76 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 76 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 131.03–137.76; submissions 2021-07-13 to 2022-02-12; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
- B ahead by 144.3%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1050173.5 samples/minGeForce GTX 1650424 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 174B · 42405,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 is ahead by 144.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050
173.5 samples/min · community measurement, sample 34 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 34 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 139.66–178.9; submissions 2025-07-22 to 2026-02-09; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
424 samples/min · community measurement, sample 143 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 143 submissions (3 outliers excluded), interquartile range 388.63–450.69; submissions 2025-07-19 to 2026-10-11; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Cycles render in Blender Benchmark. Median of the sum of samples per minute over three scenes after removing outliers.
Other comparable benchmarks (4)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 309.3 | 149.1 | B +107.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 311.9 | 153.3 | B +103.5% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 336.8 | 158.3 | B +112.8% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 162 | 428.4 | B +164.4% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (107)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 2,622.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 272.7 | 147.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 307.6 | 147.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 321.8 | 157.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 315.4 | 156.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 326.9 | 130.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 351.1 | 126.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 347.1 | 127.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 327.6 | 133.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 952.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 912.7 | 538.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 922.4 | 516.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 934.3 | 536.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 950.5 | 540.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 834 | 549.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 908.8 | 572 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 826.2 | 493.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 1,133.1 | 499.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 1,103.1 | 472.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 1,158.6 | 517.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 642 | 324.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 619.6 | 277.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 636.3 | 283.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 638.6 | 294.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 654 | 302 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 598 | 307.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 614.7 | 282.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 651.1 | 253.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 644.2 | 258.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 714.7 | 271.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 1,086.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 1,051.1 | 483 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 1,070 | 472.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 991 | 499.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 909.7 | 485.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 1,038.8 | 502.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 938.8 | 437.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 825.9 | 319.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 1,123.1 | 389.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 842.9 | 336.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,647.4 | 867.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,583.4 | 924.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,617.4 | 894.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,548.7 | 905.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,540.2 | 942.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,737.3 | 911 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 1,351.8 | 796.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 1,866.9 | 722.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 1,848.7 | 750.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 1,958.1 | 753.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 12,147.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 11,497.6 | 1,360.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 12,940.3 | 1,373 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 11,171.9 | 1,376.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 31,537.3 | 1,426.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 9,443.5 | 1,640 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 34,426.4 | 1,565.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 4,853.3 | 1,073.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 4,712.5 | 1,437.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 217.3 | 467.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 204.4 | 457.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 152.1 | 454.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 210.3 | 530.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 207.3 | 497.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 203.2 | 489.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 205 | 419.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 212.7 | 528.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 202.6 | 522.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 180.7 | 439.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 169.2 | 501.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 199.4 | 513.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 224.4 | 498.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 136.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 155.9 | 438.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 121.9 | 391.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 142.1 | 364.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 197.8 | 508.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 173.8 | 474.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 181.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 183.4 | 488.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 162.7 | 448.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 169.3 | 433.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 163.1 | 429.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 162.9 | 470 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 179.5 | 476.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 166.4 | 428.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 162.3 | 429.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 174.9 | 442.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 130 | 417 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 137.1 | 356.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | — | 1,732.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 156.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 137.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 571.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | — | 486.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 294.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 289.1 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | — | 240.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 472.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 457.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | — | 298 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 915.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 891.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | — | 702.6 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 1,215.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 1,885.3 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | — | 1,068 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1050 | B · GeForce GTX 1650 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | no data | 896 (CUDA cores) | no data for A |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | no data | 1,485 MHz | no data for A |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | no data | 1,665 MHz | no data for A |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | no data | 4 GB | no data for A |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 | equal |
| Memory bus | no data | 128 bit | no data for A |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | 75 W (TDP) | 75 W (board power) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | no data | 300 W | no data for A |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 | differs |
| Length (reference / Founders Edition)Partner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU. | no data | 130 mm | no data for A |
| Thickness (slots) | no data | 2 | no data for A |
| Power connectors (reference) | no data | 1x 6-pin | no data for A |
Chip
Architecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
Ano data
B896 (CUDA cores)
no data for AShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
Ano data
B1,485 MHz
no data for ABoost clock
Ano data
B1,665 MHz
no data for AClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
Ano data
B4 GB
no data for AMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR5
equalMemory bus
Ano data
B128 bit
no data for A
Power and dimensions
Board power
A75 W (TDP)
B75 W (board power)
not directly comparableTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Recommended PSU
Ano data
B300 W
no data for AInterface
APCIe 3.0 x16
BPCIe 3.0
differsLength (reference / Founders Edition)
Ano data
B130 mm
no data for APartner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU.
Thickness (slots)
Ano data
B2
no data for APower connectors (reference)
Ano data
B1x 6-pin
no data for A
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650: PCIe 3.0.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (3)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650checked November 7, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.0.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.2.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.