- Home
- Processors
- Videocards
- Home
- / Videocards
- / Compare videocards
- / NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB 
vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 year(s) 1 month(s) later
- Around 1% higher core clock speed: 1545 MHz vs 1530 MHz
- Around 1% higher boost clock speed: 1740 MHz vs 1725 MHz
- Around 80% higher pipelines: 2304 vs 1280
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 8 nm vs 12 nm
- Around 11% lower typical power consumption: 90 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 942 vs 751
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 12873 vs 10180
| Specifications (specs) |
| Launch date | 2022 vs 22 Nov 2019 |
| Core clock speed | 1545 MHz vs 1530 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1740 MHz vs 1725 MHz |
| Pipelines | 2304 vs 1280 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm vs 12 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt vs 100 Watt |
| Benchmarks |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 942 vs 751 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12873 vs 10180 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
- Around 10% higher texture fill rate: 138.0 GTexel/s vs 125.3 GTexel/s
- Around 12% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 55838 vs 49885
| Specifications (specs) |
| Texture fill rate | 138.0 GTexel/s vs 125.3 GTexel/s |
| Benchmarks |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 55838 vs 49885 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
| PassMark - G2D Mark | | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | | |
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 942 | 751 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 12873 | 10180 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 49885 | 55838 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 178.014 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1961.932 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 11.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 109.29 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 787.025 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 13569 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 13569 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 352 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER |
Essentials |
| Architecture | Ampere | Turing |
| Code name | GA107 | TU116 |
| Launch date | 2022 | 22 Nov 2019 |
| Place in performance rating | 88 | 283 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
| Boost clock speed | 1740 MHz | 1725 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1545 MHz | 1530 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 8 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 125.3 GFLOPS (1:64) | 138.0 GFLOPS (1:32) |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 8.018 TFLOPS (1:1) | 8.832 TFLOPS (2:1) |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 8.018 TFLOPS | 4.416 TFLOPS |
| Pipelines | 2304 | 1280 |
| Pixel fill rate | 55.68 GPixel/s | 55.20 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate | 125.3 GTexel/s | 138.0 GTexel/s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Transistor count | 6600 million |
Video outputs and ports |
| Display Connectors | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 1xDVI, 1xHDMI, 1xDisplayPort |
| DisplayPort support |
| HDMI |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
| Form factor | Dual-slot |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 242 mm, 9.5 inches | 9 inches (229 mm) |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 250 Watt | 350 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 6-pin |
| Width | 112 mm, 4.4 inches | Dual-slot |
API support |
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.4 |
| Vulkan |
Memory |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | 192 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz, 14 Gbps effective |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
Navigation
Differences Compare benchmarks Compare specifications (specs)
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare
Compare NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 4GB with others
NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs NVIDIAQuadro GP100 NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs NVIDIAGeForce RTX 2080 Ti NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3080 Mobile NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs 
AMDRadeon RX 6850M XT NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs AMDRadeon RX 7700S NVIDIAGeForce RTX 3050 4GB vs AMDRadeon RX 7600 XT About
AskGeek.io - Compare processors and videocards to choose the best.
Sections
Links
Language
English
Deutsch
Française
Español
Português
Русский © 2025, AskGeek.io