OVERALL

ALTERNATIVES

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£770VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):50 W

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 6 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

6.0/10

▼Worse than 89% of graphics cards

6.1

▼Worse than 96%

4.2

▼Worse than 92%

8.0

▲Better than 51%

?

Not in any best-of list yet

2.1
Gaming
Gaming
2.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Measures floating-point compute power, dedicated VRAM capacity, ray-tracing hardware, and modern PCIe generation bandwidth.
When it matters
When you want to play demanding mobile games, 3D titles, or run graphics-intensive apps smoothly.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
45.0%
1.2
FP32 performance
25.0%
2.3
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
4.5
Video editing
Video editing
4.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates hardware AV1 encoding support, generous video memory, raw compute power, and fast interface throughput.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific video editing needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
35.0%
7.0
AV1 encode
30.0%
2.3
VRAM
20.0%
1.2
FP32 performance
15.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
2.1
1080p
1080p
2.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Assesses pure rasterization power and VRAM balance optimized for consistently high frame rates at 1080p resolution.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1080p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
55.0%
1.2
FP32 performance
25.0%
2.3
VRAM
10.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
10.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
1.8
1440p
1440p
1.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Measures compute throughput, sufficient VRAM buffer, and ray-tracing performance tailored for sharp 1440p gaming.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 1440p needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
50.0%
1.2
FP32 performance
30.0%
2.3
VRAM
15.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version
1.9
4K
4K
1.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Evaluates ultra-high compute capability, heavy VRAM capacities, and advanced ray-tracing cores required for native 4K gaming.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this graphics-cards meets your specific 4k needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
40.0%
1.2
FP32 performance
35.0%
2.3
VRAM
20.0%
1.0
Ray tracing cores / units
5.0%
7.6
PCI Express (PCIe) version

Where to buy

N/A~ £770

Best rankings

What reviewers say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

Based on 2 · 4

Reviewers like its power use and cooling, but are split on whether its gaming performance is enough.

Praised

Mixed views

Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

Based on 173 owners sharing their experience in online comments

75%positive5%mixed20%negative

Owners praise smooth gaming at practical settings, while limited speed in demanding games means lower settings and modest frame rates.

What owners like

Runs most modern games well at mid to high settings, and many owners hit 60 fps at 1080p and some at ultra.102
Handles 1080p gaming well at medium to high settings, often reaching 60 fps, though demanding titles need lowered settings.14
Gives a clear jump over older integrated graphics and weak cards, playing games at 30 to 60 fps.9
Draws little power and needs no extra connector, so it fits old office PCs and low-profile builds with only a PCIe slot.5
Stays cool under gaming loads, with owners reporting temperatures in the 60s during long sessions.4
Handles creative and work tasks like video editing, CAD and Blender well, and runs well with extra RAM.4

What owners dislike

Struggles with demanding and newer games, often dropping to 30 to 40 fps at higher settings.27
Falls well behind newer and higher-tier cards, often delivering about half the frame rate of cards like the GTX 1080 Ti or RTX 3060 Ti.7
Some owners report sudden fps drops, stuttering, crashes and glitches, especially in demanding games or after overclocking.5

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

6.0

Show more

Hide

Performance

2.4

Show more

Hide

3DMark Time Spy benchmark score

3DMark Port Royal score

PassMark (G3D) result

PassMark (DirectCompute) result

FP32 performance

Show more

What reviewers say

Memory

2.1

Show more

Hide

VRAM

Memory type

Memory bus width

Maximum memory bandwidth

Effective memory speed

Show more

Features

7.8

Show more

Hide

PCI Express (PCIe) version

PCIe lanes

DirectX version

Vulkan version

OpenGL version

Show more

Connectivity

7.7

Show more

Hide

Max displays supported

Max digital resolution

DisplayPort outputs

DisplayPort version

DisplayPort link rates

Show more

Power

9.2

Show more

Hide

Thermal Design Power (TDP)

Power consumption while under peak load

Recommended PSU wattage

?

Board power limit

PCIe power spec

50 W

Show more

What reviewers say

Design

7.6

Show more

Hide

Size

?

Length

?

Height

?

Slot width

?

Weight

?

Show more

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop vs the average graphics card

Why is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop better than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

76.7% lower TDP
This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (50 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
50 W vs 215 W
77.3% lower board power limit
This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
50 W vs 220 W
14.3% faster VRAM clock
This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2001 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
2,001 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
11.1% higher review score
Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 51% of models
80%
7.9
Average grade
20%
8.3
Popularity
Grades by review (6)
2 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
8.0 vs 7.2
77.3% lower peak power draw
This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
50 W vs 220 W

11.1% higher review score
Reviews score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 51% of models
80%
7.9
Average grade
20%
8.3
Popularity
Grades by review (6)
2 reviews: 0 with a printed score, 2 estimated from the review. 4 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
8.0 vs 7.2

14.3% faster VRAM clock
This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (2001 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
2,001 MHz vs 1,750 MHz

76.7% lower TDP
This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (50 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
50 W vs 215 W
77.3% lower board power limit
This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
50 W vs 220 W
77.3% lower peak power draw
This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (50 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
50 W vs 220 W

Why is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop worse than the average graphics card?

Show more

Hide

37.7% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
8 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
4 GB vs 12 GB
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
32 fewer compute units
This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
8 vs 40
Less advanced frame generation
This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
128 fewer TMUs
This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (56 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
56 vs 184
74.3% lower texture rate
This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (97 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
96.96 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
2.4x larger process node
This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
12 nm vs 5 nm

46.2% lower sentiment score
4.2 vs 7.8
21.3% worse value for money
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.11 vs 7.4).
6.11 vs 7.41
48.1% more expensive
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop is more expensive than the average graphics card (£770 vs £520).
£770 vs £520

37.7% lower boost clock speed
This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
1,560 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
40 fewer ray tracing cores
This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
0 vs 40
32 fewer compute units
This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
8 vs 40
128 fewer TMUs
This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (56 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
56 vs 184
74.3% lower texture rate
This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (97 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
96.96 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
27.3% lower base clock speed
This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,395 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
1,395 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
69.1% lower pixel rate
This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (49.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
49.92 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
144 fewer AI cores
This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
0 vs 144
32 fewer ROPs
This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
32 vs 64
86.3% lower FP32 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
3.1 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
65.2% lower PassMark score
This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (7,869 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
7,869 points vs 22,638 points
74.1% lower gaming score
This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (3,833 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
3,833 points vs 14,779 points
4 years older
This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2019 vs 2023).
April 2019
2019 vs 2023
81.3% lower FP64 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
0.09 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
77.2% lower compute score
This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,750 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
2,750 points vs 12,070.5 points
79.8% lower FP16 performance
This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (6 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
5.97 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
24.5% lower ray tracing score
This graphics card has a lower ray tracing score than the average graphics card (6,905 points vs 9,148 points). The average graphics card has a ray tracing score of 9,148 points.
6,905 points vs 9,148 points
97.4% lower INT8 performance
This graphics card has a lower INT8 performance than the average graphics card (6.4 TOPS vs 242 TOPS). The average graphics card has INT8 performance of 242 TOPS.
6.4 TOPS vs 242 TOPS
3,328 fewer FP32 units
This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,024 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
1,024 vs 4,352

8 GB less VRAM
This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
4 GB vs 12 GB
71.4% lower memory bandwidth
This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (128.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
128.1 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
57.9% slower memory speed
This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (8,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
8,000 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
64 bit narrower memory bus
This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
128 bit vs 192 bit
95.8% smaller L2 cache
This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
1 MB vs 24 MB
50% smaller L1 cache
This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (64 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
64 KB vs 128 KB

Less advanced frame generation
This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
2.4x larger process node
This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (12 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
12 nm vs 5 nm
No DLSS support
This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
No ray tracing
This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
Older PCIe version
This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
3 vs 4
No AI upscalers
This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
No Resizable BAR
This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
Older DirectX version
This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
No sampler feedback
This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
79.5% fewer transistors
This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (4,700 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
4,700 million vs 22,900 million
Older FSR version
This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (3 vs 3.1).
3 vs 3.1

2 fewer DisplayPort outputs
This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
1 vs 3
No AV1 encoding
This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
Older HDMI version
This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2.0b vs 2.1a).
2.0b vs 2.1a
More basic codec support
This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
Not VR ready
This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
Older HDCP version
This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
2.2 vs 2.3
Older NVDEC generation
This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (4 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
4 vs 6
62.5% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
8.1 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps

No dual BIOS
This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
13 °C higher idle temperature
This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (50 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
50 °C vs 37 °C
8 °C higher load temperature
This graphics card has a higher load temperature than the average graphics card (75 °C vs 67 °C). The average graphics card has a load temperature of 67 °C.
75 °C vs 67 °C

No backplate
This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
No RGB lighting
This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

8.0

Kxng

≈ estimated

17/11/2025

Hands-on test · gaming on a six-year-old laptop

Verdict

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop is still very playable in 2025, especially with more RAM, though the 60 Hz screen holds it back.

9.0

VerTechHD

≈ estimated

26/05/2020

Gaming test · FPS results in five games

Verdict

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop is a solid choice for 1080p gaming at this price, with few drawbacks noted.

Not graded

Not graded

Not graded

Not graded

Hands-on video, no verdict

Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.0

notebooks-und-mobiles.de

≈ estimated

08/04/2020

Nvidia GeForce GTX 1650 (Laptop) Review

Laptop review · Lenovo Yoga C940

Verdict

GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop GPU is a solid mid-range option that runs many demanding games at Full HD, though some settings need turning down.

6.0

notebookcheck.nl

≈ estimated

07/05/2019

Kort testrapport NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop GPU - Prestaties

Short test · Laptop graphics

Verdict

GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop GPU suits Full HD gaming but falls short at 1440p and 4K, so serious gamers should look at the GTX 1660 Ti.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

Efficient power consumption (low wattage requirements)
Capable of entry-level 1080p gaming on medium settings
Excellent for e-sports titles like Fortnite, CS:GO, and Valorant
Generally operates quietly with low heat output in well-built chassis
Solid value for budget-conscious buyers seeking basic gaming performance
Good performance for creative tasks like photo and light video editing

What customers don't like about NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop

Outdated for modern AAA titles, often requiring low settings or 900p downscaling
Limited 4GB VRAM which struggles with high-resolution textures
Lack of modern features like Ray Tracing and DLSS support
Performance is significantly lower compared to the RTX 20 or 30 series
Thermal throttling can occur in thinner laptop designs without proper maintenance
Poor future-proofing as newer games become increasingly demanding

Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 for laptops is an entry-level graphics card built on the 12nm Turing architecture (TU117 chip), featuring 896 or 1024 CUDA cores and 4 GB of dedicated VRAM, typically available in GDDR5 or faster GDDR6 configurations. It operates with a core clock speed ranging from 1380 to 1395 MHz and a boost clock up to 1560 MHz, utilizing a 128-bit memory interface to provide effective bandwidth of up to 192 GB/s. Its main pros include high power efficiency with a 50W TGP, making it ideal for thin-and-light budget gaming laptops, and solid 1080p performance for popular eSports titles and casual games. However, it lacks support for modern features like Ray Tracing and DLSS, and its limited 4 GB VRAM capacity often necessitates lowering settings in newer AAA titles.

Best alternatives

AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT

Graphics cards

ZOTAC Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super Trinity

Graphics cards

PowerColor Red Devil Radeon RX 9070 XT Limited Edition

Graphics cards

INNO3D GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super Twin X2 OC

Graphics cards

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5070 Ti

Graphics cards

ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super

Graphics cards

ASUS TUF Gaming Radeon RX 9070 XT OC Edition

Graphics cards

GIGABYTE GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super WINDFORCE OC

Graphics cards

PowerColor Radeon RX 7900 XT

Graphics cards

MSI GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super Ventus 3X OC

Graphics cards

PowerColor Hellhound Radeon RX 7900 XT

Graphics cards

ASUS Dual GeForce RTX 4070 Ti Super OC Edition

Graphics cards

See best alternatives in Buying Guide

Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop with other products in the Graphics cards category

Graphic comparison of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Laptop and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found