Nvidia GTX 1060-3GB vs 1650
- CPU
- GPU
- SSD
- HDD
- RAM
- USB
VS
YouTube*NEW*
About
Watch Gameplay
| CSGO Dust 2 1080p Max |
188 EFps | Slightly Better CSGO EFps. +8% |
174 EFps | |||
| GTAV Franklin & Lamar 1080p Max |
49 EFps | 60 EFps | Better GTAV EFps. +22% |
|||
| Overwatch Temple of Anubis 1080p Max |
56 EFps | 72 EFps | Better Overwatch EFps. +29% |
|||
| PUBG M249 Training 1080p Max |
49 EFps | 72 EFps | Much Better PUBG EFps. +47% |
|||
| Fortnite UserBenchmark Island 1080p Max |
69 EFps | 79 EFps | Better Fortnite EFps. +14% |
Real World Speed
Performance profile from 819,133 user samples
Benchmark your GPU here
232,326 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 46% Gigabyte(1458 4027) ≥ 4GB
Worst Bench: 39% MSI(1462 8D92)
Poor: 39%
Great: 46%
SPEED RANK: 119th / 688
586,807 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 56% EVGA(3842 6160)
Worst Bench: 50% Asus(1043 85ED) 3GB
Poor: 50%
Great: 56%
SPEED RANK: 103rd / 688
| Effective 3D Speed Effective 3D Gaming GPU Speed |
42. 9 % |
52.7 % | Faster effective speed. +23% |
| Lighting Avg. Locally-deformable PRT (Bat) |
55.1 fps | 64.3 fps | Better lighting effects. +17% |
|||
| Reflection Avg. High dynamic range lighting (Teapot) |
58.8 fps | 70.6 fps | Better reflection handling. +20% |
|||
| MRender Avg. Render target array GShader (Sphere) |
51.9 fps | 65.9 fps | Faster multi rendering. +27% |
|||
| Gravity Avg. NBody particle system (Galaxy) |
50. 5 fps |
66.5 fps | Much faster NBody calculation. +32% |
| Lighting Locally-deformable PRT (Bat) |
60 fps | 68.6 fps | Better peak lighting effects. +14% |
|||
| Reflection High dynamic range lighting (Teapot) |
77.8 fps | 99.9 fps | Better peak reflection handling. +28% |
|||
| MRender Render target array GShader (Sphere) |
65.4 fps | 68.5 fps | +5% | |||
| Gravity NBody particle system (Galaxy) |
53.7 fps | 70 fps | Much faster peak NBody calculation. +30% |
Market Share
Based on 55,933,842 GPUs tested.
See market share leaders
| Market Share Market Share (trailing 30 days) |
1.33 % | Much higher market share. +30% |
1.02 % | |||
| Value Value For Money |
65.6 % | Better value. +21% |
54.3 % | |||
| User Rating UBM User Rating |
78 % | More popular. +18% |
66 % | |||
| Price Price (score) |
$155 | Much cheaper. +33% |
$230 |
| Age Newest |
42 Months | Much more recent. +43% |
74 Months | |||
| Parallax Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones) |
54.9 fps | 67.2 fps | Better peak texture detail. +22% |
|||
| Splatting Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm) |
48.6 fps | 64.8 fps | Much faster peak complex splatting. +33% |
|||
| Parallax Avg. Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones) |
50.2 fps | 61.3 fps | Better texture detail. +22% |
|||
| Splatting Avg. Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm) |
45.1 fps | 60.2 fps | Much faster complex splatting. +33% |
ADVERTISEMENT
Custom PC Builder (Start a new build)
Build your perfect PC: compare component prices, popularity, speed and value for money.
CHOOSE A COMPONENT:
CPU GPU SSD HDD RAM MBD
Graphics Card Rankings (Price vs Performance)
October 2022 GPU Rankings.
We calculate effective 3D speed which estimates gaming performance for the top 12 games. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield value for money. Our figures are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top GPUs. [GPUPro]
ADVERTISEMENT
Group Test Results
- Best user rated — User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
- Best value for money — Value for money is based on real world performance.
- Fastest real world speed — Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your GPU? (Bench your build)
Size up your PC in less than a minute.
Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.
UserBenchmark of the month
Gaming
Desktop
ProGaming
CPUGPUSSDHDDRAMUSB
How it works
- — Download and run UserBenchmark.
- — CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
- — GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
- — Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
- — RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
- — SkillBench (space shooter) tests user input accuracy.
- — Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.
com. - — Identify the strongest components in your PC.
- — See speed test results from other users.
- — Compare your components to the current market leaders.
- — Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
- — Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
Frequently Asked Questions
Best User Rated
-
Nvidia RTX 3060-Ti
-
Nvidia RTX 3070
-
Nvidia RTX 3050
-
Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super)
-
Nvidia RTX 3080
-
Nvidia RTX 4090
-
Nvidia RTX 2070S (Super)
-
Nvidia RTX 2060
-
Nvidia GTX 1060-6GB
-
Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super)
-
AMD RX 6600-XT
-
AMD RX 5600-XT
About • User Guide • FAQs • Email • Privacy • Developer • YouTube
Feedback
GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
Relative performance
Reasons to consider GeForce GTX 1650 |
This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
| 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 GTX 1060 3 GB |
| 18% higher gaming performance. |
| Supports PhysX |
| Supports G-Sync |
| Supports ShadowPlay (allows game streaming/recording with minimum performance penalty) |
| Supports Direct3D 12 Async Compute |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Pascal), there may be no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
HWBench recommends GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB
The GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB is the better performing card based on the game benchmark suite used (1 combinations of games and resolutions).
Core Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPU Name | TU107 () | vs | GP106 (GP106-300-A1) | |
| Fab Process | 12 nm | vs | 16 nm | |
| Die Size | 0 mm² | vs | 200 mm² | |
| Transistors | unknown | vs | 4,400 million | |
| Shaders | 896 | vs | 1152 | |
| Compute Units | 14 | vs | 9 | |
| Core clock | 1485 MHz | vs | 1506 MHz | |
| ROPs | 32 | vs | 48 | |
| TMUs | 56 | vs | 72 |
Memory Configuration
| GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | vs | GDDR5 | |
| Bus Width | 128 bit | vs | 192 bit | |
| Memory Speed | 2000 MHz 8000 MHz effective |
vs | 2002 MHz 8008 MHz effective |
|
| Memory Size | 4096 Mb | vs | 3072 Mb |
Additional details
| GeForce GTX 1650 | GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TDP | 0 watts | vs | 120 watts | |
| Release Date | 30 Apr 2019 | vs | 18 Aug 2016 |
GigaPixels — higher is better
GigaTexels — higher is better
GB/s — higher is better
GFLOPs — higher is better
Highest Detail, Pure Hair On, HBAO+, DirectX 12, Windows 10 x64
FPS (higher is better)
| VS | ||
| GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 570 |
| VS | ||
| GeForce GTX 1650 | Radeon RX 470 |
| VS | ||
| GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB | Radeon RX 570 |
| VS | ||
| GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB | Radeon RX 470 |
| VS | ||
| GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER | Radeon RX 580 2048SP |
| VS | ||
| Radeon RX 580 2048SP | Radeon RX 580X |
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.