GeForce GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650 Performance For Linux Gaming, Performance-Per-Watt

Written by Michael Larabel in Graphics Cards on 15 May 2019 at 12:00 PM EDT. Page 4 of 4. 4 Comments.
GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650
GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650
GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650
GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650
GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650

Most modern Linux games, of course, can't even run fluidly going back to Kepler.

GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650

The performance difference from GTX 650 to GTX 1650 with CUDA workloads like NAMD were even more profound.

GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650

When looking at the performance-per-Watt overall across dozens of tests, it's a 3.1x improvement from the GTX 650 to GTX 1650.

GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650

The GTX 1650 installed led to an overall AC power consumption increase of just about 14 Watts on average or a peak difference of 27 Watts.

GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650

If looking at the geometric mean of all the GTX 650 vs. GTX 1650 benchmark results, it's a 4.1x improvement going to this ~$150 USD non-RTX Turing GPU. More data over on OpenBenchmarking.org.

If you enjoyed this article consider joining Phoronix Premium to view this site ad-free, multi-page articles on a single page, and other benefits. PayPal or Stripe tips are also graciously accepted. Thanks for your support.


Related Articles
About The Author
Michael Larabel

Michael Larabel is the principal author of Phoronix.com and founded the site in 2004 with a focus on enriching the Linux hardware experience. Michael has written more than 20,000 articles covering the state of Linux hardware support, Linux performance, graphics drivers, and other topics. Michael is also the lead developer of the Phoronix Test Suite, Phoromatic, and OpenBenchmarking.org automated benchmarking software. He can be followed via Twitter, LinkedIn, or contacted via MichaelLarabel.com.