Nvidia GTX 1650 vs 1050 Ti – 18 Games Compared
Lets quickly take a look at how the newer GTX 1650 and older GTX 1050 Ti actually differ in terms of specs note that these are base model, specs different cards will vary slightly.. The 1650 has 16 more CUDA cores and is based on Nvidias, newer, Turing architecture.. The 1650 also has higher base and boost clock speeds and, while both have 4GB of GDDR5 memory, the 1650s appears to be a little faster. For the testing Im using the Gigabyte, GTX 1650 OC and the MSI GTX 1050 Ti Gaming X. 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 GTX 1650 shown by the top bar in red, while the older GTX 1050 Ti is shown below in purple.
In terms of average FPS. The 1650 was 32 ahead of the 1050 Ti at 1080p, rising up to a 37 improvement at 1440p. Assassins Creed. Odyssey was tested with the built in benchmark using high settings and, as expected, the 1650 was ahead here performing 30 better at 1080p over the 1050 Ti, then slightly higher at 32 at 1440p, while even the 1 lows from the 1650 were above the averages from the 1050 Ti. Battlefield 5 was tested in campaign mode rather than multiplayer as its easier to consistently reproduce the test run. At 1080p. The 1650 was 27 ahead of the 1050 Ti here, rising to 31 at 1440p., Due to the high 1 low. I think you could actually get away with the 1650 at 1440p, though, maybe turn down the settings to medium., Far Cry New Dawn was tested using the built in benchmark with high settings and was another game where even the 1 lows from the 1650 were ahead of The averages from the 1050 Ti. At both 1080p and 1440p, the 1650 was 25 ahead of the 1050 Ti in this test.. 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 24 boost at both 1080p and 1440p, with the 1650. Fortnite was tested using the replay feature, with the exact same replay on both graphics cards.
. The 1050 Ti was still able to reach 60 FPS averages at 1080p, even with epic settings in use. However, the 1650 was 20.5 ahead here, lowing to a 13.7 lead at 1440p. Metro Exodus was tested with the built in benchmark at high settings.. The actual game performs a fair bit ahead of this, so this is more of a synthetic test rather than representative of actual game play, but it does allow me to accurately compare between the two graphics cards.. With that in mind, the 1650 was 30 ahead of the 1050 Ti at 1080p and 28 ahead. At 1440p., Shadow of the Tomb Raider was also tested using the built in benchmark with high settings.. This seems to be more of a graphically intensive test as out of all games tested. It saw the largest improvement at 1440p of 41.6 and 3rd largest improvement at 1080p. Out of all 18 games tested with 34 higher average FPS over the 1050 Ti. Rainbow. Six Siege was tested using the built in benchmark at high settings.. This is a game that Ive found to perform better with Nvidias, newer, turing architecture, and it was seeing quite a nice improvement with the 1650 with 33.5 higher average FPS over the 1050 Ti at 1080p and a 35 boost at 1440p. 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., This game saw one of the smallest differences between the two graphics cards, with just a 11.5 improvement at 1080p, with the 1650 and a 10.6 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., While both were giving fairly good frame rates, considering the highest epic setting preset was in use. Even at 1440p, like CSGO, there was less of a difference between the two. At 1080p were looking at a 13 improvement with the 1650 lowering to 10 faster at 1440p.. Pubg was tested using the replay feature with the exact same replay at high settings, and the 1650 was needed to hit the 60 FPS sweet spot at 1080p here. In terms of differences. The 1650 was reaching 30.7 higher average FPS than the 1050 Ti at 1080p and 34.7 higher at 1440p.. The 1650 was also giving massive improvements to 1 low too, with a 44 increase at 1080p and 37 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 I wouldnt want to use 1440p here, though it would probably be fine with high or lower settings. Anyway, in terms of differences. The 1 lows from the 1650 were again above the averages provided by the 1050 Ti, while at 1080p the 1650 was 18 ahead of the 1050 Ti in average FPS and 16.
7 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 1650 was 23.6 ahead of the 1050 Ti in average, FPS lowering to a 17.5 lead at 1440p., The Witcher 3 was tested with Hairworks disabled. At 1080p. The 1650 was achieving 25 higher average frame rates over the 1050 Ti lowering again to 22. At 1440p, although at 1440p there was a much larger 59 boost to 1 low. Strange Brigade was tested with the built in benchmark using Vulkan with Async compute enabled maxed out at ultra settings.. At 1080p, the 1650 was seeing its largest improvement out of all 18 games tested with 37 higher average FPS over the 1050 Ti, and also a 37 improvement at 1440p. Coming in at second place out of 18 at this resolution. DOOM was also tested using Vulkan, and there was quite a big difference in this game. Too. At 1080p, the 1650 was 31 ahead of the 1050 Ti rising up to a 36 boost at 1440p, while the 1 lows from the 1650 were above, the averages from the 1050 Ti. Shadow of War was tested with the built in benchmark and like Rainbow. Six is another game Ive found to benefit from Nvidias Turing architecture. At 1080p. It came in at second place with 34 higher average FPS over the 1050 Ti and 35 higher at 1440p.. In terms of overall improvement over all 18 games tested with a 1080p resolution.
On average, the GTX 1650 was performing 26.7 better when compared with the GTX 1050 Ti in terms of average FPS.. As we can see, it really depends on the specific game. Esports titles like CSGO, Overwatch and Fortnite, for example, were closer towards the bottom. At 1440p. On average, over the same 18 games, the GTX 1650 was now scoring just a little higher on average, compared to the 1080p results just shown now, with 27.1 higher average FPS. Again theres, no major differences to those esports titles down the bottom of the graph, while more Gpu demanding games were seeing larger improvements. 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 some others have reported so Im, not 100 certain, whether that affected results.. As for the differences in total system, power draw, the 1650 was only slightly ahead, so it is at least good to see that not that much extra power is required here for a fair boost in performance.. Now lets look at one of the main reasons I was interested in making this video.. I saw Nvidia tweet this image the other day showing the performance boosts to expect from their 1650 graphics and rather than take them at face value.
I wanted to see if I could work out just how accurate and honest theyre being. In typical Nvidia fashion theyre, not providing the exact frame rates so were not off to a good start, but we can extrapolate the information to get a rough idea.. They do note that theyre using an 8700K system with 16GB of memory at 1080p and while no exact speeds are given thats quite similar to my setup.. So how did my results? Compare to Nvidias claims PUBG seems pretty easy to work out 60 FPS at 1080p in their 1650 test, and it looks like around 46 or 47 FPS for the 1050 Ti just 2 3 FPS below my results.. That would mean Nvidia are claiming a 30.4 performance increase and well, as we saw, I was seeing almost a 31 boost, so thats looking about right. In Fortnite as best I can tell here, Nvidia are showing 59 FPS with the 1050 Ti and 74 FPS with the 1650, again, fairly close to my results, though, resulting in a 25 improvement with the 1650, which is a little above, my 20.5 difference. Rainbow Six Siege. On the other hand, I feel is a bit of a best case result, though Ive noted in many comparisons that the game seems to perform noticeably better with Nvidias new Turing cards over Pascal.. In any case, though, I wasnt quite seeing the big difference, theyve got here. Looks like the 1050. Ti is around maybe 45 FPS about in the center of the 30 and 60 FPS points, while the 1650 appears to be around 70 FPS, which gives it a massive 59 improvement.
If Im right. At 1080p, I saw a 33.5 increase on the 1650. However, I was using the built in benchmark. Steve at Hardware, Unboxed tests, this game in actual game play, and even if we use his numbers, there was a 46 difference. So, Im not too sure how Nvidia got that one, I presume different parts of the game would give different results, though, even in all of my 18 game tests, I was nowhere near close to a 59 improvement on the 1650. Apex is a bit easier to work Out the results are the same as what they had for PUBG, so around 46 or 47 FPS, most likely with 60 FPS from the 1650, fairly close to my own results and again around a 30 improvement. Once more close to the 31.8 improvement, I was seeing.. It looks like Nvidia are at least being honest here and not providing super skewed results for the most part, though Rainbow Six was a bit iffy. Now lets start talking about price and value.. 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.. While the 1050 Ti, which came out around two and a half years ago in October 2016, had an MSRP of 1', however, today its going for closer to the 180 USD mark on the lower side. At first glance, youd think Nvidia has put out a card thats, Cheaper than what the 1050 Ti is currently available for, while also performing better everyones a winner right.
If we lived in an Nvidia only world, maybe, however thats simply not the case., The fact is AMD are offering the RX 570 for less than the GTX 1650 around 130 USD new and the 570 performs better as well its much better value.. This is before we even consider that its been out for 2 years already, so you can probably pick one up cheaper. On the second hand, market., While Im not explicitly comparing to the 570 in this video, it would have been a crime not to mention this and dont worry. I will also be comparing the 570 against the 1650 in an upcoming video. I just wanted to show the difference between the 1050 Ti and the 1650 here, as I saw a lot of people who were curious in the differences. In isolation, the 1650 does look like a fair improvement over the 1050 Ti, which is exactly how Nvidia seem to Be marketing it, but once you take into account options from AMD its, not great at all., If you were buying today, let me know which card youd pick down in the comments and why the newer GTX, 1650 or older GTX 1050 Ti and if either of these.