GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU 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 +9.9%NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU leads in this scenario (up to 9.9% 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 1650 is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Where GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU is better2
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0 9.9% faster466 samples/min vs 424 samples/min
Shader units 128 more1,024 (CUDA cores) vs 896 (CUDA cores)
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.
- 0.7% difference, within the threshold
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce GTX 1650158.3 sGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU159.5 sPosition among tested models (27, CUDA)
A · 158B · 1590100200300400Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, s. The 0.7% difference is below the noticeable threshold (5%).
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
158.3 s · community measurement, sample 89 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 89 submissions (7 outliers excluded), interquartile range 154.87–163.22; submissions 2020-09-03 to 2021-12-13; 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.
- B ahead by 9.9%
Blender Benchmark 4.5.0
GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) · samples/min, higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650424 samples/minGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU466.2 samples/minPosition among tested models (67, OptiX)
A · 424B · 46605,00010,00015,000Each dot is one model’s median in this benchmark. The scale starts at zero, samples/min. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU is ahead by 9.9% in this benchmark.
About the measurement and source
- A · 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.
- 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 (106)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, barbershop_interior (CUDA) | 1,732.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 147.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 147.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 149.1 | 402.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 153.3 | 142.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 156.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 157.6 | 157.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 156.3 | 150.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 134.4 | 133.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 130.3 | 117.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 137.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 126.2 | 133.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 127.4 | 118.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | 133.9 | 120 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, classroom (CUDA) | 538.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 516.2 | 1,373.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 536.1 | 503.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 540.8 | 535.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 571.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 549.2 | 683.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 572 | 534.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 493.7 | 467.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 499.4 | 679 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 486.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 472.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, classroom (OPTIX) | 517.5 | 528.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 324.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 277.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 283.1 | 720.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 294.8 | 361.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 302 | 297.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 294.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 289.1 | 309.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 307.4 | 271.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 282.2 | 279.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 253.8 | 232.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 240.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 258.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, fishy_cat (OPTIX) | 271.6 | 233.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, koro (CUDA) | 483 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, koro (CUDA) | 472.3 | 1,126.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, koro (CUDA) | 499.5 | 469.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (CUDA) | 485.1 | 474 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 472.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (CUDA) | 457.8 | 492.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (CUDA) | 502.7 | 440.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (CUDA) | 437.8 | 404.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 319.9 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 298 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 389.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, koro (OPTIX) | 336.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 867.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 924.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 894.6 | 2,287.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 905.8 | 868.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 942.6 | 936.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 915.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 891.3 | 1,004.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 911 | 864.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (CUDA) | 796.1 | 780.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 722.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 702.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 750.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, pavillon_barcelona (OPTIX) | 753.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,360.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,373 | 5,168.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,376.7 | 1,899.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,426.6 | 1,882.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,215.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,885.3 | 2,078.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.92GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,640 | 2,216.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (CUDA) | 1,565.5 | 1,964.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,073.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,068 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, victor (OPTIX) | 1,437.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 467.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 457.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 454.8 | 510.1 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 530.9 | 553.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 497.2 | 600.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 489.7 | 558.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 419.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 528.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 522.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 439.3 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 501.2 | 554.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 513.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 498.5 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 438.5 | 483.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 391.6 | 447.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 364.1 | 399.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.0.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 508.8 | 533.9 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 474.7 | 466.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 488.5 | 533.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.2.1GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 448.8 | 438.8 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 433.3 | 497.5 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 429.7 | 449.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 470 | 519.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 476.8 | 510.3 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 428.9 | 500 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 429.3 | 462.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.3.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 442.7 | 472 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 4.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 428.4 | 471.4 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 417 | 467.6 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 5.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | 356.4 | 425.2 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.2GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (OptiX / HIP / oneAPI / Metal) | — | 511.7 | 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 1650 | B · GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| Architecture | Turing | Turing | equal |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | 896 (CUDA cores) | 1,024 (CUDA cores) | B: 128 more |
| Clocks | |||
| Base clock | 1,485 MHz | 1,350 MHz | A: 135 MHz more |
| Boost clockClocks of different architectures do not reflect performance directly. For laptop chips, the clock depends on the laptop’s power limit. | 1,665 MHz | 1,485 MHz | A: 180 MHz more |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 4 GB | 4 GB | equal |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 | differs |
| Memory bus | 128 bit | 128 bit | equal |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | no data | 192 GB/s | 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 (board power) | 55 W (TDP) | not directly comparable |
| Recommended PSU | 300 W | no data | no data for B |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 x16 | differs |
| Length (reference / Founders Edition)Partner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU. | 130 mm | no data | no data for B |
| Thickness (slots) | 2 | no data | no data for B |
| Power connectors (reference) | 1x 6-pin | no data | no data for B |
Chip
Architecture
ATuring
BTuring
equalShader units
A896 (CUDA cores)
B1,024 (CUDA cores)
B: 128 moreShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Clocks
Base clock
A1,485 MHz
B1,350 MHz
A: 135 MHz moreBoost clock
A1,665 MHz
B1,485 MHz
A: 180 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
A4 GB
B4 GB
equalMemory type
AGDDR5
BGDDR6
differsMemory bus
A128 bit
B128 bit
equalMemory bandwidth
Ano data
B192 GB/s
no data for AExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A75 W (board power)
B55 W (TDP)
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
A300 W
Bno data
no data for BInterface
APCIe 3.0
BPCIe 3.0 x16
differsLength (reference / Founders Edition)
A130 mm
Bno data
no data for BPartner cards have different dimensions; check the specific SKU.
Thickness (slots)
A2
Bno data
no data for BPower connectors (reference)
A1x 6-pin
Bno data
no data for B
“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 1650 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU have?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650: 4 GB GDDR5, 128-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 1650: PCIe 3.0. NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU: PCIe 3.0 x16.
Which is faster: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 or NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU?
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Laptop GPU 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)
- NVIDIA — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650checked November 7, 2026
- Wikipedia (English) — 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 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.92, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, 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 5.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 5.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.2checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.