GeForce GTX 1650 vs RTX A400
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 4GB VRAM GeForce GTX 1650 and 4GB VRAM RTX A400 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
GeForce GTX 1650 's Advantages
Larger VRAM bandwidth (128.1GB/s vs 96.00GB/s)
128 additional rendering cores
RTX A400 's Advantages
Released 5 years late
Boost Clock has increased by 6% (1762MHz vs 1665MHz)
Lower TDP (50W vs 75W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
GeForce GTX 1650
+10%
2984
RTX A400
2706
3DMark Time Spy
GeForce GTX 1650
+70%
3566
RTX A400
2091
Graphics Card
Apr 2019
Release Date
Apr 2024
GeForce 16
Generation
Quadro Ampere(Ax000)
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 3.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 4.0 x8
Clock Speeds
1485 MHz
Base Clock
1417 MHz
1665 MHz
Boost Clock
1762 MHz
2001 MHz
Memory Clock
1500 MHz
Memory
4GB
Memory Size
4GB
GDDR5
Memory Type
GDDR6
128bit
Memory Bus
64bit
128.1GB/s
Bandwidth
96.00GB/s
Render Config
14
SM Count
6
896
Shading Units
768
56
TMUs
24
32
ROPs
16
-
Tensor Cores
24
-
RT Cores
6
64 KB (per SM)
L1 Cache
128 KB (per SM)
1024 KB
L2 Cache
2 MB
Theoretical Performance
53.28 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
28.19 GPixel/s
93.24 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
42.29 GTexel/s
5.967 TFLOPS
FP16 (half)
2.706 TFLOPS
2.984 TFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.706 TFLOPS
93.24 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
42.29 GFLOPS
Board Design
75W
TDP
50W
250 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
1x DVI
1x HDMI 2.0
1x DisplayPort 1.4a
Outputs
4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
None
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
TU117
GPU Name
GA107
TU117-300-A1
GPU Variant
-
Turing
Architecture
Ampere
TSMC
Foundry
Samsung
12 nm
Process Size
8 nm
4.7 billion
Transistors
8.7 billion
200 mm²
Die Size
200 mm²
Graphics Features
12 (12_1)
DirectX
12 Ultimate (12_2)
4.6
OpenGL
4.6
3.0
OpenCL
3.0
1.3
Vulkan
1.3
7.5
CUDA
8.6
6.6
Shader Model
6.8
