[ad_1]
Based on the TU117, the new GeForce GTX 1650 always includes all the new Turing shader innovations that improve performance and efficiency, including support for simultaneous floating-point and full-line operations, unified cache architecture with a cache N1 more important and adaptive shading.
The new GPU's TDP is only 75 watts, which means it does not require an external power connector. This is the fastest graphics card available that does not require an external PCIe power supply. So like the GTX 1660 Ti and 1660, there will be no Founders Edition, but no big loss.
The GTX 1650 contains 896 CUDA cores, 36% less than what you get with the GTX 1660. This is the biggest degradation we've seen in the Turing product stack. For the most part, we have seen reductions of about 20% between 2080 and 2070, from 2070 to 2060, from 2060 to 1660 Ti, then barely 8% between 1660 Ti and 1660 Ti.
RTX 2080 Ti over RTX 2080 is the only other example of degradation below about 30%. In this case, we found a 32% reduction in the number of cores and a 25% reduction in performance at 4K. We expect a similar reduction in GTX 1650 performance compared to the 1660, with a 36% reduction in core and a 33% reduction in memory bandwidth.
In addition, while the 1660 is armed with 6 GB of GDDR5 memory, the GTX 1650 gets 4 GB using a simple 128-bit memory bus for a maximum memory bandwidth of 128 GB / s. The default clock speeds were set on a base of 1485 MHz and on a boost of 1665 MHz, a reduction of 7% of the clock speed compared to the GTX 1660.
Nvidia claims that the GTX 1650 is twice as fast as the GTX 950 and up to 70% faster than the GTX 1050 in 1080p, although the formulation is a little tricky here because their claim is specific to modern games with complex shaders. Thus, games such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Wolfenstein II, for example. As a result, the average performance increase may be lower depending on the stock.
For testing, we will take a close look at 1080p performance in a dozen titles. Our test system is the usual GPU bench that includes a Core i9-9900K clocked at 5 GHz with 32 GB DDR4-3200 memory …
Marks
Kickstarting the benchmarks is a new title in our test suite: World War Z. This game supports the Vulkan API, although the performance of Nvidia GPUs is not excellent with the current driver. GeForce cards have been tested with DX11, while AMD uses the lower level. Vulkan API. Despite this, the Radeon RX 570 smoked the new GTX 1650 with a huge margin of 38%. Meanwhile, the GTX 1650 was 26% slower than the 1050 Ti, but also 15% slower than the 1060 3GB.
The performance in Apex Legends was very competitive between the GTX 1650 and the RX 570, at least in the silent part of the game we tested. The Radeon graphics processor was faster with a low margin of 4% and generally less than 5% is considered a draw.
Division 2 was a solid title for AMD and it continues with this battle between the RX 570 and the GTX 1650. Here, the Radeon graphics processor offered 27% additional performance in 1080p, making it a high quality graphics processor .
Nvidia has promised good things in new complex titles such as Shadow of the Tomb Raider, but we can see here that the GTX 1650 is simply not up to par. Performance was similar to that of the RX 570, but for a new graphics processor, similar performance is not enough. The GTX 1650 should comfortably beat the 570 at this price level.
The GTX 1650 seriously beats in Forza Horizon 4, where it was 21% slower than the RX 570. This difference was also noticeable in the game since the RX 570 had never dropped below 60 fps, which allowed it to offer a smoother gaming experience.
On average, when testing with Just Cause 4, the Radeon RX 570 was 11% faster than the 1650. This is usually a good title for Nvidia, but even then, the new Turing budget fails to do so .
Resident Evil 2 is another new title that works well on AMD hardware. Here, the RX 570 was 30% faster than the GTX 1650. While the Radeon graphics processor was able to maintain more than 60 frames per second at any time, the 1650 dropped to 50 frames per second.
A game on which you can always count to improve the performance of the GeForce is Fortnite. Here, the GTX 1650 is able to outpace the RX 570 with a small margin. The GTX 1650 was also 26% faster than the 1050 Ti.
Metro Exodus is a title sponsored by Nvidia, so you expect the GTX 1650 to win here, but that's not the case. Basically, it is the RX 570 but it's the best choice we can make here.
Rainbow Six Siege throws us a curved ball, but given what we saw of Turing in this title, I was ready to do it. Here, the GTX 1650 is able to beat the RX 570 and by a convincing margin, a pity we have not seen more.
We see similar frame rates in Battlefield V. The RX 570 was slightly faster on average while both provided a similar similar result of 1%. This means that the GTX 1650 was 26% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti and 11% slower than the 1060 3GB.
The GTX 1650 does not impress in Far Cry New Dawn, recording 23% more than the GTX 1050 Ti but 18% less than the RX 570. In fact, at 1080p with the ultra quality presetting, it has struggled to achieve an average of 60 frames per second.
Energy consumption and temperatures
Turning now to energy consumption, the GTX 1650 is quite impressive in this respect. The Gigabyte card we tested pushed the system's total power consumption to 184 watts, while the MSI card reached 192 watts. This is only about a 10% increase in the system draw for what appeared to be a performance improvement of over 30%.
In comparison, the Radeon RX 570 increased total system consumption by 55%. The 1650 is certainly more efficient, but we are not convinced that it is globally a better product.
Quickly reviewing operating temperatures and clock speeds, the MSI Gaming X reached a peak of 61 degrees in a 21-degree room, which allowed it to operate normally at a boost rate of 1920 MHz. Needless to say, it was very cool and calm.
The largest gigabyte Gaming OC was able to achieve this result with a maximum operating temperature of only 58 degrees, which allowed it to obtain an average of 1950 MHz for the boosted clock. Regarding performance in terms of frame rate, it did not make any difference, but a slightly colder speed for a slight increase in the frequency is a victory for Gigabyte.
Performance summary
At this point, your socks must be in place, the GeForce GTX 1650 has been quite disappointing so far. But to have a clearer picture, let's look at some direct comparisons.
GTX 1650 vs GTX 1050 Ti
Nvidia continues to compare the GTX 1650 to the GTX 1050, but the 1650 costs $ 10 more than the introductory price of the 1050 TiSo, it does not replace the GTX $ 1050 to $ 110. Compared to the 1050 Ti, the 1650 is 35% faster on average for a few dollars more. After three years, a 35% increase at this price level is quite disappointing.
GTX 1650 vs GTX 1060 3 GB
Compared to the 3GB GTX 1060 (a more expensive GPU in the past), the GTX 1650 was about 9% slower. Admittedly, the 1060 cost $ 200, but again, it's a 3 year old GPU. The GTX 1650 only offered slight performance gains in a few titles, but in the best case, it was not even 5% faster than the outgoing Pascal GPU.
GTX 1650 vs GTX 1060
Compared to the GTX 1660, the GTX 1650 was 32% slower than the other, which seems good, since it is 32% cheaper, it looks pretty good. At least in a GTX Turing bubble, that's the case. But as you will see in this price range, there is a lot of competition with the fall of AMD prices in reaction to the latest versions of Nvidia.
GTX 1650 vs Radeon RX 570
We have here the RX 570 which costs $ 170, or at least once upon a time. For many months, this Radeon GPU has been selling for $ 130 and there are currently many options at this price. This makes the GTX 1650 ~ 15% more expensive and yet we found it to be 10% slower on average.
In some titles, this gap was as slow as 20%, so the GTX 1650 can not compete with the Radeon.
pack
Our cost per image chart will provide a definitive picture of the GTX 1650's position at launch. Two years after the release of the RX 570, we get a more expensive GPU per image.
Even if we ignore the very poor price / quality ratio of the RX 570, the RX 580 remains a better quality-price ratio thanks to its recent price reductions, offering much more performances for a slightly higher price. We can see that the GTX 1650 offers a value level similar to that of the 1660, but at less than $ 200 where Nvidia is facing fierce competition and where additional frame rates can make all the difference, we do not so we will not cut it to make our recommendation.
At the current price of $ 150, the GTX 1650 is not a bad product, but if you're looking for the best frame rates for every dollar you spend, the RX 570 is simply better. At $ 110, the 1650 would have been competitive, not particularly exciting but at least competitive.
Some would say that the GTX 1650 is great because it does not need external power connector, but you would be in the head. You can improve your diet if needed for around $ 35 to a decent model of 450 to 500 watts, which will save you trouble. In addition, we found that the GTX 1650s lacking external PCIe power supply are less clocked because they are limited to 75 watts (the MSI and Gigabyte cards tested here were equipped with a power connector), which would have impact on performance. In other words, you could end up with a very small upgrade compared to the GTX 1050 Ti.
We bought an additional GTX 1650 base board without a power connector, and we are going to evaluate this view in the near future, but we have no reason to believe that the tests will better understand the GTX 1650. GPU options classic and affordable, we were seduced by the RTX 2060, GTX 1660 Ti and 1660, receiving in all cases our recommendations. For less money, the RX 570 is still alive.
Business Shortcuts:
[ad_2]
Source link