Component comparison
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 940M
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 940M — detailed GPU comparison: performance, gaming FPS, specifications.
Advantages
A
GeForce GTX 1650
- + Release year (+5)
- + VRAM (GB) (+2 GB)
- + Memory clock (MHz) (+600 MHz)
- + Bandwidth (GB/s) (+114 GB/s)
- + Memory bus (bit) (+64 bit)
- + Lithography (nm) (-16 nm)
- + Transistors (M) (+2,830M)
- + CUDA cores (+640)
- + TMUs (+40)
- + ROPs (+24)
- + FP32 performance (TFLOPS) (+1.40 TFLOPS)
- + Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) (+35.71 GPixel/s)
- + Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) (+58.10 GTexel/s)
- + Energy efficiency (+20.1)
- + PassMark (overall) (+5983)
- + 3DMark Fire Strike (+7691)
- + Geekbench OpenCL (+33128)
- + Geekbench Vulkan (+31699)
- + Normalized score (+47.1)
B
GeForce 940M
- + TGP / TDP (W) (+25 W)
- + Die size (mm²) (+52 mm²)
Detailed spec comparison
| Spec |
Component A
GeForce GTX 1650
|
Component B
GeForce 940M
|
|---|---|---|
| Release year | 2020 (+5) | 2015 |
| VRAM (GB) | 4 GB (+2 GB) | 2 GB |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | DDR3 |
| Memory clock (MHz) | 1500 MHz (+600 MHz) | 900 MHz |
| Bandwidth (GB/s) | 128 GB/s (+114 GB/s) | 14 GB/s |
| Memory bus (bit) | 128 bit (+64 bit) | 64 bit |
| TGP / TDP (W) | 50 W | 75 W (+25 W) |
| Lithography (nm) | 12 nm (-16 nm) | 28 nm |
| Transistors (M) | 4,700M (+2,830M) | 1,870M |
| Die size (mm²) | 200 mm² | 148 mm² (+52 mm²) |
| Base clock (MHz) | — | 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock (MHz) | — | 1098 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 1,024 (+640) | 384 |
| TMUs | 64 (+40) | 24 |
| ROPs | 32 (+24) | 8 |
| RT cores | — | — |
| Tensor cores | — | — |
| FP32 performance (TFLOPS) | 2.30 TFLOPS (+1.40 TFLOPS) | 0.90 TFLOPS |
| Pixel fill rate (GPixel/s) | 53.28 GPixel/s (+35.71 GPixel/s) | 17.57 GPixel/s |
| Texture fill rate (GTexel/s) | 93.24 GTexel/s (+58.10 GTexel/s) | 35.14 GTexel/s |
| Energy efficiency | 26.4 (+20.1) | 6.4 |
| PassMark (overall) | 7,116 (+5983) | 1,133 |
| 3DMark Time Spy | 3,488 | — |
| 3DMark Fire Strike | 9,313 (+7691) | 1,622 |
| Geekbench OpenCL | 39,153 (+33128) | 6,025 |
| Geekbench Vulkan | 36,248 (+31699) | 4,549 |
| Normalized score | 53.3 (+47.1) | 6.2 |
In both
CUDA
FPS in games (1080p)
| Game | GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce 940M | Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| Anno 1800 | 34 FPS | 7 FPS | +385.7% (A) |
| Ashes of the Singularity | 36 FPS | 9 FPS | +300% (A) |
| Batman: Arkham Knight | 67 FPS | 12 FPS | +458.3% (A) |
| Battlefield 1 | 75 FPS | 15 FPS | +400% (A) |
| Battlefield 5 | 60 FPS | 17 FPS | +252.9% (A) |
| CS:GO | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 131 FPS | 9 FPS | +1355.6% (A) |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 52 FPS | 5 FPS | +940% (A) |
| Darksiders III | 57 FPS | 13 FPS | +338.5% (A) |
| Doom | 109 FPS | 17 FPS | +541.2% (A) |
| Dota 2 | 96 FPS | 49 FPS | +95.9% (A) |
| ELEX | 59 FPS | 11 FPS | +436.4% (A) |
| F1 2018 | 91 FPS | 17 FPS | +435.3% (A) |
| F1 2019 | 70 FPS | 18 FPS | +288.9% (A) |
| FIFA 19 | 94 FPS | 34 FPS | +176.5% (A) |
| Far Cry 5 | 60 FPS | 11 FPS | +445.5% (A) |
| Farming Simulator 19 | 98 FPS | 19 FPS | +415.8% (A) |
| For Honor | 77 FPS | 14 FPS | +450% (A) |
| Fortnite | 90 FPS | 36 FPS | +150% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 82 FPS | 14 FPS | +485.7% (A) |
| Forza Horizon 5 | 73 FPS | 6 FPS | +1116.7% (A) |
| GTA V | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| GTA V | 68 FPS | 14 FPS | +385.7% (A) |
| Ghost Recon Wildlands | 57 FPS | 10 FPS | +470% (A) |
| Kingdom Come: Deliverance | 53 FPS | 10 FPS | +430% (A) |
| Metro Exodus | 33 FPS | 2 FPS | +1550% (A) |
| Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor | 84 FPS | 13 FPS | +546.2% (A) |
| Mirror's Edge Catalyst | 69 FPS | 12 FPS | +475% (A) |
| Need for Speed Payback | 78 FPS | 13 FPS | +500% (A) |
| Overwatch | 240 FPS | 240 FPS | ≈ |
| PUBG | 140 FPS | 140 FPS | ≈ |
| Rainbow Six Siege | 154 FPS | 20 FPS | +670% (A) |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 46 FPS | 3 FPS | +1433.3% (A) |
| Resident Evil 7 | 95 FPS | 15 FPS | +533.3% (A) |
| Rise of the Tomb Raider | 58 FPS | 10 FPS | +480% (A) |
| Rocket League | 96 FPS | 24 FPS | +300% (A) |
| Star Wars Battlefront 2 | 66 FPS | 13 FPS | +407.7% (A) |
| Star Wars Jedi Fallen Order | 60 FPS | 11 FPS | +445.5% (A) |
| The Crew 2 | 60 FPS | 11 FPS | +445.5% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 62 FPS | 10 FPS | +520% (A) |
| The Witcher 3 | 45 FPS | 10 FPS | +350% (A) |
| Total War: Three Kingdoms | 39 FPS | 9 FPS | +333.3% (A) |
| Valorant | 164 FPS | 40 FPS | +310% (A) |
| World of Warships | 85 FPS | 37 FPS | +129.7% (A) |
Specs from public sources (PassMark, Geekbench). FPS measured at 1080p medium settings.
Based on the comparison:
GeForce GTX 1650 wins 19 of the comparable criteria.
The choice depends on your use case.
🤔 How to choose
Universal advice for any use case.
- Reliability vs price: reliability (median 50) ↔ price (median 385.1).
- Weight vs CPU: mobility (median 48) ↔ overall performance (median 49.8).
- Upgradeability vs battery: upgradability (median 50) ↔ battery life (median 2.8).