Lets quickly. Take a look at how the newer GTX 1650 and older 1060 3GB actually differ in terms of specs note that these are base model. Specs different cards will vary slightly.. The 1060 3GB has 28 more CUDA cores and is based on Nvidias older Pascal architecture. While the 1650 uses the newer Turing architecture., The 1060 has higher base and boost clock speeds, but less memory and also costs more. You can find updated pricing linked in the description.. The 1060 is also available in the 6GB version, which has more CUDA cores and double the memory, but were not looking at that version here. So if I just say 1060 without specifying the memory assume, I mean the 3GB model. For the testing Im using the Gigabyte, GTX 1650 OC and the ASUS GTX 1060 3GB. So both have a little factory. Overclock expect slightly different results with different models.. The system that Im testing with has an Intel i7 8700K CPU overclocked to 5.0GHz in an MSI Z'0 ACE motherboard, along with 16GB of T Force Night. Hawk CL16 memory from Team Group running at DDR4 3200 in dual channel. Check the links in the description for details on all of the components as well as for up to date, pricing. The same Windows updates, game updates and Nvidia driver 430.' were used for the testing. So lets get into the results. Lets start out Apex Legends which was tested with all settings. Maxed out., Ive tested with higher settings in the upcoming games than Id actually play with in most cases as thats better for GPU comparison, purposes.

In all upcoming graphs. Ive got the newer GTX 1650 shown by the top bar in red, while the older GTX 1060 3GB is shown below in purple. In terms of average FPS. The 1060 is 7.5 faster than the 1650 and just 2.5 ahead. At 1440p. Assassins Creed Odyssey was tested with the built in benchmark using high settings, and there was almost no difference between the two graphics cards here at either 1080p or 1440p.. The 1060 was just slightly ahead in average FPS 1.5 higher at 1080p and 1.2 at 1440p.. Battlefield 5 was tested in campaign mode rather than multiplayer as its easier to consistently reproduce the test run.. This was another game that saw minimal difference between the two with the 1060 just 2.5 higher in average frame rate at 1080p, increasing to 6.3 higher at 1440p.. Far Cry New Dawn was tested using the built in benchmark with high settings, and the 1 low with the 1060 was almost ahead of the average from the 1650. At both 1080p and 1440p, there was a 20 boost to average FPS with the 1060.. Far Cry. 5 was also tested using the built in benchmark with high settings, and this game was seeing higher FPS over the newer, Far Cry New Dawn just shown. For average frame rate. There was a 21 boost at 1080p and 18 at 1440p, with the 1060. Fortnite was tested. Using the replay feature with the exact same replay on both graphics cards, and I saw a big improvement with the 1060 in this test.

. The 1 lows from the 1060 were above the average FPS from the 1650 at both resolutions, while average FPS at 1080p saw the 1060 come out 27.6 ahead of the 1650 and 35 at 1440p. The second biggest difference out of all 18 games, tested. Metro Exodus was tested with the built in benchmark at high settings.. Most parts of the game perform a fair bit better than this. So dont take these results as a good indication of what to expect throughout the entire game its more of a worst case. It does, however, allow me to perform an accurate comparison.. With that in mind, the 1060 was getting 26 higher average FPS over the 1650 at 1080p and 28. At 1440p., Shadow of the Tomb Raider was also tested using the built in benchmark with high settings.. There was less of a difference here, an 8 improvement to average FPS at 1080p and 6 higher at 1440p, with the 1060. Rainbow Six Siege was tested using the built in benchmark at high settings. In terms of improvement with the 1060. This game was on the lower side out of the titles tested, I think, as it seems, to benefit from Nvidias Turing architecture.. In any case, there was an 11 improvement to average FPS at 1080p, with the 1060 and 13 at 1440p, a bit below average. CSGO was tested with the Ulletical FPS benchmark, and both cards were capable of providing very high frame rates in this test.

Granted the 8700K is, of course, contributing a lot here. Too. In this test, there was a fairly good 21 boost to average FPS with the 1060 at 1080p and much larger 35 improvement at 1440p.. Overwatch was tested in the practice range as I can easily perform the same test run compared to playing with bots or other players, which will differ every time.. This game generally runs quite well even at 1440p, the 1650 was at least playable.. This game saw the largest difference out of all 18 tested with the 1060, a massive 35 higher in average FPS at 1080p, rising to a ' lead at 1440p. PUBG was tested using the replay feature with the exact same replay at high settings.. Youll probably want to stick to 1080p in this game for a decent frame rate. There was a 17 higher average frame rate here with the 1060 and 14 higher average FPS at 1440p. Watch. Dogs 2 is a resource, intensive game and was tested with very high settings.. In my opinion, this one doesnt need a high frame rate to play. I can get by with a solid 30 FPS, so the 1060 was giving me a playable experience even at 1440p., In terms of difference to average frame rate. The 1060 was 24 ahead of the 1650 at 1080p and 28 ahead. At 1440p., Ghost Recon was tested with the built in benchmark and high settings in use and is another resource heavy game.

At 1080p. The 1060 was 17 ahead of the 1650 in average FPS, rising to a 23 improvement. At 1440p., The Witcher 3 was tested with Hairworks disabled. At 1080p. The 1060 was achieving 23 higher average FPS than the 1650 increasing slightly to a 24 lead at 1440p, where the 1 low from the 1060 is now above. The average from the 1650. Strange Brigade was tested with the built in benchmark using Vulkan and maxed out at ultra settings. At both 1080p and 1440p. The 1060 was 17 ahead of the 1650 in average. Fps. DOOM was also tested using Vulkan and was the only game out of all 18, where I saw the 1650 actually coming out ahead, not too sure why.. The 1060 was 10 behind at 1080p and 8 at 1440p., Shadow of War was tested with the built in benchmark and in this one the 1060 saw 19 higher average FPS at 1080p, lowering slightly to 16 at 1440p.. In terms of overall improvement over all 18 games tested with a 1080p resolution on average, the GTX 1060 3GB was performing 16.1 better when compared with the GTX 1650 in terms of average FPS.. As we can see, it really depends on the specific game. Some saw small changes, while others performed much better on the 1060, while DOOM was the only one that went better with the 1650. At 1440p. On average, over the same 18 games, the GTX 1060 3GB was now scoring a little higher on average, compared to the 1080p results just shown now, with 17.

8 higher average FPS. Its worth. Noting, though, that I dont consider either of these 1440p capable cards in the majority of games tested, I just wanted to see how the resolution would affect the percentage difference, as it should be more GPU intensive when compared with 1080p. Heres. What were looking at in terms of synthetic benchmarks, Ive just tested, 3DMarks, Firestrike, Timespy and VRMark here. Ill note that in Timespy with the 1650 I did have some black screen flickering, which is apparently a bug with the latest Nvidia drivers Im, not sure if it affects The results though. As for the differences in total system power draw while gaming, the 1650, was using less power, while the 1060 was using about 26 more in comparison.. Now, for the final difference, the price. I suggest, checking updated prices using the links in the description, as prices will change over time.. The 1650 just launched at 149 USD and can currently be bought for that price. On the low end., The 1060 3GB launched for 199 USD back in August 2016, so its more than 2 and a half years old. At this point, and today it still seems to go for around that point. New., Based on these numbers, were looking at paying about 33 more money to go to the 1060 3GB.. The exact model of 1060 I have here can be picked up for 213 new, while my 1650 is 160, so again, 33 more money for around 16, more performance on average at 1080p in the games tested here.

In the context of a whole system, though the percentage Difference will, of course, lower, as this is just one component of many., If you saw my 1650 vs RX 570 video, the 570 was about 12 faster than the 1650 in these same games and costs less at around the 130 mark. So, just based on that alone, the 570 should perform fairly close to the 1060 3GB, while costing about 70 cheaper new. Let me know if you want to see a comparison between those in a future video., As the 1060 has been out for two and a half years now, youre much more likely to find better pricing. On the second hand, market at least compared to the 1650, which only just came out. With a quick search. I found some for closer to the 100 mark, which is much better in terms of price to performance., While the 1060 3GB still does alright in 1080p gaming. For the most part, as weve seen here, buying a 3gb card in 2019 is hard to recommend for longevity reasons.. This does make the 4GB and cheaper 1650 look attractive. However, it doesnt perform as well, and as mentioned, there are better alternatives, say a used 570 for 80 with 4gb of memory.. You could argue. The 1650 is more power efficient, its true, but it also performs worse, so youd have to accept that, and it would take quite a long time of gaming before it actually started to affect your power bill.

. If you were buying today. Let me know which card youd pick down in the comments and why the GTX 1650 or GTX 1060 3GB, and if youre new to the channel, get subscribed for future comparisons and tech.