GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTS 250
Summary
Reasons to consider GeForce GTX 1650 |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
| Higher theoretical gaming performance, based on specifications. |
| Supports PhysX |
| Supports G-Sync |
| Supports ShadowPlay (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty) |
| Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute |
| Supports DirectX Raytracing (DXR) |
| Supports Deep Learning Super-Sampling (DLSS) |
Reasons to consider GeForce GTS 250 |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
| PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor |
HWBench recommends GeForce GTX 1650
Based on theoretical specifications.
Core Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| GPU Name | TU107 () | vs | G92B (G92-428-B1) |
| Fab Process | 12 nm | vs | 55 nm |
| Die Size | 0 mm² | vs | 260 mm² |
| Transistors | unknown | vs | 754 million |
| Shaders | 896 | vs | 128 |
| Compute Units | 14 | vs | 8 |
| Core clock | 1485 MHz | vs | 702 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | vs | 16 |
| TMUs | 56 | vs | 64 |
Memory Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | vs | GDDR3 |
| Bus Width | 128 bit | vs | 256 bit |
| Memory Speed | 2000 MHz
8000 MHz effective | vs | 1000 MHz
2000 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 4096 Mb | vs | 1024 Mb |
Additional details
| GeForce GTX 1650 | | GeForce GTS 250 | |
|---|
| TDP | 0 watts | vs | 150 watts |
| Release Date | 30 Apr 2019 | vs | 4 Mar 2009 |
GeForce GTX 1650
53.28 GP/s
GeForce GTS 250
11.20 GP/s
GigaPixels - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
93.24 GT/s
GeForce GTS 250
44.90 GT/s
GigaTexels - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
128.00 GB/s
GeForce GTS 250
64.00 GB/s
GB/s - higher is better
GeForce GTX 1650
2984.00 GFLOPs
GeForce GTS 250
387.10 GFLOPs
GFLOPs - higher is better