Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650 OC Specifications
Here are the key specs for the Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650:
With a 300W recommended PSU size for the Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650 4GB, this is designed for systems that use less power than some of the higher-end GPUs that STH tests. We can see a large drop-off in specs compared to the GTX 1660 which would be the next model up, and in our testing, we will see how that impacts performance.
Testing the Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650 OC
Here is the test configuration for our system:
• Motherboard: ASUS WS C621E SAGE Motherboard
• CPU: 2x Intel Xeon Gold 6134 (8 core / 16 Threads)
• GPU: Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650 OC
• Cooling: Noctua NH-U14S DX-3647 LGA3647
• RAM: 12x Micron 16GB Low Profile
• SSD: Samsung PM961 1TB
• OS: Windows 10 Pro
GPU-Z shows the primary stats of our testing the Gigabyte GeForce GTX 1650 OC. The GPU clocks in at 1485 MHz and can boost up to 1710 MHz, and GDDR5 Memory at 2001 MHz. Pixel fillrates run at 54.7 GPixels/s, and texture fillrate comes in at 126.5 GTexel/s.
Software Used: Gigabyte AORUS Engine
Gigabyte supplies AORUS Engine for the GeForce GTX 1650 OC overclocking and various other settings, a monitor on the left side will show different card performance graphs that allow the user to keep an eye on what the GTX 1650 OC is doing.
On higher-end graphics cards, AORUS Engine will have additional settings that include simple performance buttons for OC, Gaming, Silent and User profiles. Our Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC does not have these additional settings.
Let us move on and start our testing with GPU compute benchmarks.
comptue is used twice on page 6.
Performance might seem on par with other nvidia models but if you compare this by price to lets say a RX570 or RX580, its very bad value for money.
You included too much worthless information and not enough practical information. We’re is the 1060 and 1070? Who gives a shit about how it stacks up against a Titan rtx x2? Get real.
I think this is one of NVidia’s most useless cards ever.
First the memory leaks, now the patent issue with Xperi Corp. It are hard times for mister “the more you buy, the more you save”. Linus Torvals will laugh his head off.
OVERALL SCORE 9.1?
Value 9.3?
Are you out of your mind?
How about comparison with cheaper and more powerful rx570?
I think people are being a little unfair here – or perhaps unrealistic – bearing in mind the target audience of the site is home severs, which may not have a PSU that supports extra power.
Yes, the price is high for the performance on an absolute scale. But that does not recognize that you simply *cannot get* a 75W PCIe-only powered card that matches it from AMD. No RX 580 or RX 570 here – no, you will be stuck with the RX 560 (or RX 460) and the same 4GB RAM, getting anywhere from two thirds to a half the performance, or maybe even less: https://www.anandtech.com/show/14270/the-nvidia-geforce-gtx-1650-review-feat-zotac
The WX8200, that meets the 1650 in some benchmarks, and does twice as well in others, uses *three* times the power – a TDP of 230W.
Absolutely, wait for Navi to see if it can do better. I hope it does, because I want to use a card with good open-source drivers. But if you can’t – if you need 75W, no more, now – this may be the best there is; and it’s priced accordingly.
This was clearly written by someone who doesn’t know anything about computer hardware or gpus.
We’ve been using these in many of our servers exactly for what you describe. We’re using them with Xeon D Supermicro boards powered off of the motherboard in 1U systems. It looks like someone here has linked and brought the gaming kids here. NVIDIA’s still where it’s at if you want inferencing at the edge. Anyone that thinks AMD’s in the game today against CUDA isn’t in the space. Maybe that’ll change, but NVIDIA’s easy and it works, AMD there’s always troubleshooting.
@Paul I can tell you it’s useful to us. We buy a spectrum of GPU’s for our customers. Having this info top to bottom is handy both for us and for our customers.
Good review. I’d like to see a blower style 1650 review since that’s the sweet spot in the market
Most of the comments here seem to have been made by those who own a giant rig and a powerful PSU — gamers. For those of us who prefer a system with a small physical footprint and low power consumption, while still being able to play at 1080p competently, this card is basically it for now until the fabled RX 3060 comes out. The comparison between this and the RX570 simply isn’t fair due to the huge discrepancy in power consumption. I do love AMD and support them when I can to create competition to Intel and NVIDIA, but it’s been a known fact that they compensate with lack of finesse with just raw and massive heat/power/energy consumption, which could costs end users hundreds if not thousands of dollars per year, and is horrible for the environment.
Hi, Thank you for providing such valuable information. In my opinion, the GeForce GTX 1650 is an excellent Graphics Card. It is in the best interests of everyone….