GeForce GTX 1080 Ti vs GeForce GTX 1650: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 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 +202%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti leads in this scenario (up to 202% 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 1080 Ti is better10
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 139.2% lower56 s vs 134 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 113% lower61 s vs 130 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 187.1% lower172 s vs 494 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 127.1% lower124 s vs 282 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 98.6% lower220 s vs 438 s
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1 156.3% lower311 s vs 796 s
Blender Benchmark 2.90 202% lower472 s vs 1,427 s
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 93.7% faster821 samples/min vs 424 samples/min
Video memory 7 GB more11 GB vs 4 GB
Memory bus 224 bit more352 bit vs 128 bit
Where GeForce GTX 1650 is better1
Launch price $550 lower$149 vs $699
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions.
- A ahead by 139.2%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti56.2 sGeForce GTX 1650134.4 sPosition among tested models (31, CUDA)
A · 56B · 1340100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 139.2% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
56.2 s · community measurement, sample 76 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 76 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 55.4–57.39; submissions 2021-07-11 to 2022-03-01; 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.
- A ahead by 113%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti61.2 sGeForce GTX 1650130.3 sPosition among tested models (17, OptiX)
A · 61B · 130050100150Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 113% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
61.2 s · community measurement, sample 47 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 47 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 58.87–65.51; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2021-01-31; OPTIX backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
130.3 s · community measurement, sample 23 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 23 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 125.32–131.5; submissions 2020-09-05 to 2021-08-24; OPTIX 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 187.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, classroom (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti172 sGeForce GTX 1650493.7 sPosition among tested models (26, CUDA)
A · 172B · 4940200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 187.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
172 s · community measurement, sample 58 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 58 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 169.09–175.74; submissions 2021-07-19 to 2022-03-01; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
493.7 s · community measurement, sample 46 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 46 submissions (5 outliers excluded), interquartile range 479.05–499.89; 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.
- A ahead by 127.1%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti124.3 sGeForce GTX 1650282.2 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
A · 124B · 2820100200300Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 127.1% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
124.3 s · community measurement, sample 46 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 46 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 122.73–126.56; submissions 2021-07-21 to 2022-02-24; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
282.2 s · community measurement, sample 31 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 31 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 269.36–300.06; 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.
- A ahead by 98.6%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, koro (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti220.4 sGeForce GTX 1650437.8 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
A · 220B · 4380200400600Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 98.6% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
220.4 s · community measurement, sample 41 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 41 submissions (8 outliers excluded), interquartile range 218.9–224.53; submissions 2021-07-21 to 2022-02-24; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
437.8 s · community measurement, sample 29 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 29 submissions (1 outliers excluded), interquartile range 424.2–492.04; 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.
- A ahead by 156.3%
Blender Benchmark 2.93.1
GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti310.6 sGeForce GTX 1650796.1 sPosition among tested models (21, CUDA)
A · 311B · 7960200400600800Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 156.3% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
310.6 s · community measurement, sample 42 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 42 submissions (10 outliers excluded), interquartile range 308.52–315.53; submissions 2021-07-21 to 2022-02-24; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
796.1 s · community measurement, sample 22 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 22 submissions (2 outliers excluded), interquartile range 772.6–831.24; 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.
- A ahead by 202%
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, victor (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti472.4 sGeForce GTX 16501,426.6 sPosition among tested models (20, CUDA)
A · 472B · 1,42705001,0001,500Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 202% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
472.4 s · community measurement, sample 155 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 155 submissions (17 outliers excluded), interquartile range 463.04–482.59; submissions 2020-09-02 to 2021-01-27; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
1,426.6 s · community measurement, sample 49 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 49 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 1314.64–1802.53; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-08-24; 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 93.7%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1080 Ti821.4 samples/minGeForce GTX 1650424 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
B · 424A · 82105,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti is ahead by 93.7% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti
821.4 samples/min · community measurement, sample 57 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 57 submissions (6 outliers excluded), interquartile range 808.6–840.55; submissions 2025-07-18 to 2026-03-07; 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 (24)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.2 | 149.1 | A +139.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.1 | 153.3 | A +139.1% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 69.9 | 158.3 | A +126.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 64.3 | 156.3 | A +143.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.3 | 516.2 | A +168.4% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 194.8 | 536.1 | A +175.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 197.9 | 540.8 | A +173.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 124.1 | 294.8 | A +137.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 127.4 | 302 | A +137% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.2 | 472.3 | A +92.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 216.7 | 485.1 | A +123.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 329.7 | 894.6 | A +171.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 359 | 942.6 | A +162.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 821.5 | 438.5 | A +87.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 868 | 474.7 | A +82.9% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 883.9 | 448.8 | A +97% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 878.4 | 433.3 | A +102.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 879.8 | 429.7 | A +104.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.7 | 470 | A +89.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 889.8 | 476.8 | A +86.6% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 830.7 | 428.9 | A +93.7% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 842.2 | 429.3 | A +96.2% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 829 | 442.7 | A +87.3% |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 820.8 | 428.4 | A +91.6% |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Reference results (82)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 529.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 532.3 | 1,732.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 62.5 | 147.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 63.2 | 147.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 65.4 | 157.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.8 | 126.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 61.3 | 127.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 62.7 | 133.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 189.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 192.2 | 538.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 193.9 | 549.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 185 | 572 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 212.6 | 499.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 216.5 | 486.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.1 | 472.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 221.4 | 517.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.6 | 324.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 121.3 | 277.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 123.4 | 283.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 122.4 | 289.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 119.1 | 307.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.4 | 253.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 115.5 | 240.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 119.4 | 258.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 117.4 | 271.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, koro (CUDA) | 245.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 248.4 | 483 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 236 | 499.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 214.6 | 457.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 213.3 | 502.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 132.1 | 319.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 133.7 | 298 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 172.2 | 389.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 135.1 | 336.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 331 | 867.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 330.5 | 924.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 337.5 | 905.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 341.4 | 891.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 334.7 | 911 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 330.9 | 722.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 326.6 | 702.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 333.8 | 750.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 334.1 | 753.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, victor (CUDA) | 493.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 491.8 | 1,360.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 487.7 | 1,373 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 478.1 | 1,376.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 460.2 | 1,885.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.5 | 1,640 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 521.3 | 1,565.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 447.9 | 1,073.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 436.1 | 1,068 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 480.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 462.5 | 1,437.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 936.1 | 467.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 873.8 | 457.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 895.1 | 454.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 976.1 | 530.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 931.9 | 497.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 928.2 | 419.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 960.5 | 528.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 886.4 | 439.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 905.1 | 501.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 925.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 969.1 | 498.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 685.3 | 391.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 699.6 | 364.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 935.9 | 508.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 780.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 888.7 | 488.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 726.9 | 417 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 695.2 | 356.4 | reference |
| 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 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | — | 294.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | — | 472.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | — | 915.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | — | 1,215.8 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 489.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 522.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 513.4 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
| Specification | A · GeForce GTX 1080 Ti | B · GeForce GTX 1650 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GP102-350-K1-A1 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 3,584 (CUDA cores) | 896 (CUDA cores) | not directly comparable |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,481 MHz | 1,485 MHz | B: 4 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,582 MHz | 1,665 MHz | B: 83 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 11 GB | 4 GB | A: 7 GB more |
| Memory type | GDDR5X | GDDR5 | differs |
| Memory bus | 352 bit | 128 bit | A: 224 bit more |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 484.4 GB/s | no data | no data for B |
| 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. | 250 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
GPU chip
AGP102-350-K1-A1
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
APascal
BTuring
differsShader units
A3,584 (CUDA cores)
B896 (CUDA cores)
not directly comparableShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,481 MHz
B1,485 MHz
B: 4 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,582 MHz
B1,665 MHz
B: 83 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
A11 GB
B4 GB
A: 7 GB moreMemory type
AGDDR5X
BGDDR5
differsMemory bus
A352 bit
B128 bit
A: 224 bit moreMemory bandwidth
A484.4 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A250 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
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: 11 GB GDDR5X, 352-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650: 4 GB GDDR5, 128-bit bus.
Which PCIe interface do the cards use?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti: PCIe 3.0 x16. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650: PCIe 3.0.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 Ti 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 1080 Ti, 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 3.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.3.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.2.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2, 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.