GeForce GTX 1070 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 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
A +42.3%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 leads in this scenario (up to 42.3% 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 1070 is better5
Blender Benchmark 2.90 42.3% lower112 s vs 159 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 12.3% faster524 samples/min vs 466 samples/min
Video memory 4 GB more8 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 128 bit more256 bit vs 128 bit
Memory bandwidth 64.3 GB/s more256.3 GB/s vs 192 GB/s
Where GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU is better1
Board power 95 W lower55 W (TDP) vs 150 W (TDP)
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.
- A ahead by 42.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1070112.1 sGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU159.5 sPosition among tested models (27, CUDA)
A · 112B · 1590100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is ahead by 42.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
112.1 s · community measurement, sample 249 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 249 submissions (15 outliers excluded), interquartile range 109.66–114.44; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-10-14; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU
159.5 s · community measurement, sample 20 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 20 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 155.16–160.43; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-04-28; 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.
- A ahead by 12.3%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1070523.6 samples/minGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU466.2 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
B · 466A · 52405,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 is ahead by 12.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
523.6 samples/min · community measurement, sample 72 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 72 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 509.18–537.94; submissions 2025-07-25 to 2026-03-05; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU
466.2 samples/min · community measurement, sample 31 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 31 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 436.99–491.89; submissions 2025-07-19 to 2026-10-06; 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.
Reference results (109)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 988.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,012.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 103.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 102.9 | 402.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.6 | 142.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 105.4 | 157.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 104.2 | 150.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 90.2 | 133.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 108.5 | 117.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 162.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 107.8 | 133.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 109.1 | 118.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 108.3 | 120 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 361.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 353.4 | 1,373.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 363.8 | 503.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 365.3 | 535.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 329.9 | 683.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 351.7 | 534.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 317.9 | 467.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 396.6 | 679 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 630.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 389.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 386.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 412.9 | 528.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 205.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.7 | 720.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 213 | 361.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 217.2 | 297.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 204 | 309.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 208.4 | 271.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 211.5 | 279.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 205.8 | 232.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 322.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 200.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 204.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 213.2 | 233.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 408.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 401 | 1,126.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 393.7 | 469.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 359.7 | 474 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 345.7 | 492.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 362.2 | 440.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 369 | 404.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 239.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 377.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 228.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 316.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 247.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 580.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 575.1 | 2,287.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 588.2 | 868.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 604.4 | 936.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 558.8 | 1,004.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 582.9 | 864.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 550.6 | 780.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 579 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 873.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 560.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 558.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 592.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 836.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 906.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 878.9 | 5,168.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 807.6 | 1,899.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 800.4 | 1,882.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 763.4 | 2,078.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 867.1 | 2,216.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 850.4 | 1,964.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 778.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,202.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 752.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 818.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 848.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 705.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 639.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 642.2 | 510.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 653.8 | 553.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 619.2 | 600.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 647.6 | 558.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 631.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 653 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 610.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 662.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 606.7 | 554.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 628.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 534.5 | 483.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 449.5 | 447.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 474.2 | 399.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 624.6 | 533.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.2 | 466.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.1 | 533.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 572.3 | 438.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.4 | 497.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 567.6 | 449.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 573.3 | 519.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 574 | 510.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 540.2 | 500 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 548 | 462.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 522.5 | 472 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 527.1 | 471.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 461.2 | 425.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 511.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 467.6 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1070 | B · GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP104-200-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 1,920 (CUDA cores) | 1,024 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,506 MHz | 1,350 MHz | A: 156 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,683 MHz | 1,485 MHz | A: 198 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 8 GB | 4 GB | A: 4 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 | differs |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 128 bit | A: 128 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 256.3 GB/s | 192 GB/s | A: 64.3 GB/s more |
| 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. | 150 W (TDP) | 55 W (TDP) | A: 95 W higher |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 | equal |
Chip
GPU chip
AGP104-200-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
A1,920 (CUDA cores)
B1,024 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,506 MHz
B1,350 MHz
A: 156 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,683 MHz
B1,485 MHz
A: 198 MHz moreClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit.
Memory
Video memory
A8 GB
B4 GB
A: 4 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A256 bit
B128 bit
A: 128 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A256.3 GB/s
B192 GB/s
A: 64.3 GB/s moreExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A150 W (TDP)
B55 W (TDP)
A: 95 W higherTGP (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.
Interface
APCIe 3.0 x16
BPCIe 3.0 x16
equal
“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
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070: 8 GB GDDR5, 256-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU: 4 GB GDDR6, 128-bit bus.
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU: PCIe 3.0 x16.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 leads in every scenario with comparable benchmarks: rendering and compute. This does not imply an advantage in tasks without benchmarks.
See also
Data sources (2)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 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 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.0.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.