• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Palit GeForce GTX 1650 StormX OC 4 GB

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
19,101 (3.46/day)
Processor Core i7-4790K
Memory 16 GB
Video Card(s) GTX 1080
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 7
The Palit GeForce GTX 1650 StormX OC comes at NVIDIA MSRP of $150, but features an out of the box overclock. It also doesn't require an additional 6-pin power connector, which makes it the easiest upgrade to get more FPS on an older computer without worrying about PSU requirements.

Show full review
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,531 (0.79/day)
Those video outputs... Not that bad drop in performance than I feared it to be but yeah MSRP is much too high for what you get. Those power numbers makes me wonder do you take measurements on that 3.3V line at all? 66W is max allowed for 12V Watt line pcie slot has.
 
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
1,041 (0.94/day)
Location
Pristina
System Name My PC
Processor 4670K@4.4GHz
Motherboard Gryphon Z87
Cooling CM 212
Memory 2x8GB+2x4GB @2400GHz
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX 580 GTS Black Edition 1425MHz OC+, 8GB
Storage Intel 530 SSD 480GB + Intel 510 SSD 120GB + 2x500GB hdd raid 1
Display(s) HP envy 32 1440p
Case CM Mastercase 5
Audio Device(s) Sbz ZXR
Power Supply Antec 620W
Mouse G502
Keyboard G910
Software Win 10 pro
Great review like always, but price should be 99$ and for RX 570 too
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
1,411 (1.62/day)
Processor i5-8400
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING
Cooling CRYORIG C7 Cu
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 2080 Phoenix
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Logitech G700
Keyboard Corsair K60
ASUS Strix GTX 1650 uses 81/87W (peak gaming and Furmark) and gets 1978/1980MHz (average/median).
Palit StormX GTX 1650 uses 66/66W and gets 1910/1905MHz.
Performance difference is a mere 2-3%.

This is way better than I was expecting.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,531 (0.79/day)
ASUS Strix GTX 1650 uses 81/87W (peak gaming and Furmark) and gets 1978/1980MHz (average/median).
Palit StormX GTX 1650 uses 66/66W and gets 1910/1905MHz.
Performance difference is a mere 2-3%.

This is way better than I was expecting.
Looking those Voltage graphs I would say Strix is using higher gpu voltage for keeping clocks stable in all cases, while Palit varies it lot for sustaining given power budget.
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2011
Messages
2,819 (1.03/day)
System Name Zimmer Frame Rates
Processor Intel i7 920 @ Stock speeds baby
Motherboard EVGA X58 3X SLI
Cooling True 120
Memory Corsair Vengeance 12GB
Video Card(s) Palit GTX 980 Ti Super JetStream
Storage Of course
Display(s) Crossover 27Q 27" 2560x1440
Case Antec 1200
Audio Device(s) Don't be silly
Power Supply XFX 650W Core
Mouse Razer Deathadder Chroma
Keyboard Logitech UltraX
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores Epic
Yeah this is more like it, a small compact plug and play card... that sips power and still offers 90% of the RX 570's performance.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
1,411 (1.62/day)
Processor i5-8400
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING
Cooling CRYORIG C7 Cu
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 2080 Phoenix
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Logitech G700
Keyboard Corsair K60
Looking those Voltage graphs I would say Strix is using higher gpu voltage for keeping clocks stable in all cases, while Palit varies it lot for sustaining given power budget.
Makes sense.
It would be really interesting to know though what the differences exactly are in terms of games. Are there specific games where power limit will kick in sooner and limit performance more?
@W1zzard how do you keep track of frequencies and power? Does the data allow to check the clock speeds and power usage per game?
 
Joined
Dec 18, 2005
Messages
6,982 (1.41/day)
System Name money pit..
Processor Intel 8700K at 5000 mhz.. 1.32 volt core
Motherboard Asus rog Strix Z370-F Gaming
Cooling Dark Rock TF air cooler.. Stock vga air coolers with case side fans to help cooling..
Memory 32 gb corsair vengeance 3200
Video Card(s) Palit Gaming Pro OC 2080TI
Storage 150 nvme boot drive.. 1T Sandisk sata.. 1T Transend sata.. 1T 970 evo nvme m 2..
Display(s) 27" Asus PG279Q ROG Swift 165Hrz Nvidia G-Sync, IPS.. 2560x1440..
Case Gigabyte mid-tower.. cheap and nothing special..
Audio Device(s) onboard sounds with stereo amp..
Power Supply EVGA 850 watt..
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech K270
Software Win 10 pro..
Benchmark Scores Firestike 29500.. timepsy 14000..
yep just what a 1650 card should be..

trog
 
Joined
Apr 12, 2013
Messages
2,497 (1.10/day)
Not weird at all, they're using 9900k so you'd get a better idea where the GPU's holding the system back.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
1,411 (1.62/day)
Processor i5-8400
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX Z370-I GAMING
Cooling CRYORIG C7 Cu
Memory 2*16GB DDR4-3200 CL16
Video Card(s) Gainward GeForce RTX 2080 Phoenix
Storage 1TB Samsung 970 Pro, 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1TB Crucial MX500
Display(s) ASUS PG279Q, Eizo EV2736W
Case Dan Cases A4-SFX
Power Supply Corsair SF600
Mouse Logitech G700
Keyboard Corsair K60
Not weird at all, they're using 9900k so you'd get a better idea where the GPU is holding the system back.
Already deleted the post as I think I was on the wrong track there. Was not commenting on using 9900K but at a surprisingly low power consumption numbers considering the test system. They got 93.3W for power consumption (55.3W idle) in a 9900K-based system. Looking at how they test, it is averaged over first half of Unigine Superposition. The delta here is 38W and GTX 1650 should idle at only a few watts.
 
Joined
Jan 13, 2018
Messages
147 (0.28/day)
System Name N/A
Processor Intel Core i5 3570
Motherboard Gigabyte B75
Cooling Coolermaster Hyper TX3
Memory 12 GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) Zotac Mini GTX 1070
Storage SSD/HDD
Display(s) Samsung 4K HDR 60 Hz TV
Case Eagle Warrior Gaming
Audio Device(s) N/A
Power Supply Coolermaster Elite 460W
Mouse Vorago KM500
Keyboard Vorago KM500
Software Windows 10
Benchmark Scores N/A
Palit GTX 1650 StormX is 35% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti, and 10% behind the Radeon RX 570. This makes the card 12% slower than even GTX 1060 3 GB, 65% slower than GTX 1060 6 GB, and a whopping 50% behind GTX 1660

Really? 65% slower than 1060 6 GB?
 

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
19,101 (3.46/day)
Processor Core i7-4790K
Memory 16 GB
Video Card(s) GTX 1080
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 7
Palit GTX 1650 StormX is 35% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti, and 10% behind the Radeon RX 570. This makes the card 12% slower than even GTX 1060 3 GB, 65% slower than GTX 1060 6 GB, and a whopping 50% behind GTX 1660

Really? 65% slower than 1060 6 GB?
Ah it should be 26%, typo, fixed, thanks!

how do you keep track of frequencies and power? Does the data allow to check the clock speeds and power usage per game?
I assume you mean for the clock vs voltage scatter plot with the blue markers? No way to track "which game"
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Messages
195 (0.18/day)
System Name Baxter
Processor Intel i7-5775C @ 4.2 GHz 1.34 V
Motherboard ASRock Z97-E ITX/AC
Cooling be Quiet! Shadow Rock LP with Noctua NF-A12 fan
Memory 16 GB 2400 MHz CL11 HyperX Savage DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X 8G @ 1949 MHz (no overvolt, love your GPU)
Storage 256 GB Lexar NM520 NVMe SSD (boot), 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO, and 4TB Toshiba X300 7200 RPM HDD
Display(s) Vizio P65-F1 4KTV
Case Raijintek Ophion
Audio Device(s) HDMI PCM 5.1, Vizio 5.1 surround sound
Power Supply Siverstone SX500-LG 500W
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G613 and Microsoft Media Keyboard
This is really the only type of 1650 that makes sense. Small, ITX-compatible, no need for external power. The other models that were reviewed are the equivalent of trying to turbocharge a Prius. You missed the point by taking an efficiency play and trying to wring out all the power.

This is a good peek into what the 1650 is going to mean for gaming laptops. And if Steam Boxes were still a thing, this would be the perfect card. Essentially, a low-powered console-level PC with matching power efficiency and reasonable heat output and sound. I'm tempted to put together a 1650 with a T-class Intel and SFF gold 400 W power supply. This thing would work really well for a LAN PC.

Now, if you have a regular desktop, buy a 570, of course. The price is still too high and/or performance is still too low to make sense without focusing on the efficiency aspect.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2017
Messages
367 (0.43/day)
So it is about 15% slower than an RX 570 4GB and costs $20 more. Latter is a 2 year old card. Not to speak of the RX570 you bought with 2 AAA titles until about late March - early April. Waiting for the green-eyed ones to defend this crap. :D This card is the worst of the 20/16 series along with the RTX 2080 and 2080 Ti regarding price/performance, even the RTX 2070 is along. Only the 1660, 1660 Ti and 2060 makes any sense regarding price/performance.



This is really the only type of 1650 that makes sense. Small, ITX-compatible, no need for external power. The other models that were reviewed are the equivalent of trying to turbocharge a Prius. You missed the point by taking an efficiency play and trying to wring out all the power.

This is a good peek into what the 1650 is going to mean for gaming laptops. And if Steam Boxes were still a thing, this would be the perfect card. Essentially, a low-powered console-level PC with matching power efficiency and reasonable heat output and sound. I'm tempted to put together a 1650 with a T-class Intel and SFF gold 400 W power supply. This thing would work really well for a LAN PC.

Now, if you have a regular desktop, buy a 570, of course. The price is still too high and/or performance is still too low to make sense without focusing on the efficiency aspect.
Nope. None of the 1650s make sense. And there are mini ITX version of the RX570 too (Sapphire Pulse, for example).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
1,775 (0.66/day)
Location
Bulgaria
System Name Sandfiller
Processor I3-7100
Motherboard Asus PRIME Z270-P
Cooling NZXT Kraken X31
Memory 2 x 8GB Cruicial 2400 mhz DDR4 CL17
Video Card(s) Asus RX 480 4GB
Storage Cruicial M.2 275GB drive + WD black 500 GB + WD Blue 640 GB
Display(s) 2560x1080 LG 29" + LG 22MP67VQ-P
Case TT Urban R31
Audio Device(s) Creative Recon 3D
Power Supply Fractal Design IntegraM 650W
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Dell Somethin wireless
Software Windows 10 x 64 bits
Those video outputs...
My first thought. I have two displays: one DP and one HDMI. You can use adapters with the card...but come on.
 
Joined
Aug 21, 2015
Messages
32 (0.02/day)
Location
North Dakota
System Name Oswald
Processor i5-6600K
Motherboard MSI Z170-A PRO
Cooling Cryorig M9i
Memory 8GB Mushkin Redline DDR4-2800
Video Card(s) XFX R9 380 4GB
Storage Plextor M8Pe 128GB, Intel 520 120GB, Toshiba DT01ACA200
Display(s) Sharp 46" TV
Case Superpower Zephyr
Power Supply Antec Edge 550
Mouse Logitech K400
Keyboard Logitech K400
Software Windows 10 Home
Joined
Apr 19, 2011
Messages
2,084 (0.70/day)
Location
So. Cal.
Great review like always, but price should be 99$ and for RX 570 too
Completely agree this is so devoid of outputs, while just a lump of aluminum what-a-rip.

Why is the price of a 1050 Ti $170?
Those released with MSRP of $139, own at least that what TPU own Database indicates. While Tom's review at the time said. "expect GeForce GTX 1050 and 1050 Ti to shake up the space between $100 and $150. Nvidia tells us that its vanilla 1050 should start at $110, while the 1050 Ti sells from $140".

A thoroughly "decontented" and pedestrian build card, now being 8% more money and like 25% faster after some 2-1/2 years is lackluster.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2016
Messages
195 (0.18/day)
System Name Baxter
Processor Intel i7-5775C @ 4.2 GHz 1.34 V
Motherboard ASRock Z97-E ITX/AC
Cooling be Quiet! Shadow Rock LP with Noctua NF-A12 fan
Memory 16 GB 2400 MHz CL11 HyperX Savage DDR3
Video Card(s) MSI GTX 1080 Gaming X 8G @ 1949 MHz (no overvolt, love your GPU)
Storage 256 GB Lexar NM520 NVMe SSD (boot), 500 GB Samsung 850 EVO, and 4TB Toshiba X300 7200 RPM HDD
Display(s) Vizio P65-F1 4KTV
Case Raijintek Ophion
Audio Device(s) HDMI PCM 5.1, Vizio 5.1 surround sound
Power Supply Siverstone SX500-LG 500W
Mouse Logitech MX Master 2S
Keyboard Logitech G613 and Microsoft Media Keyboard
So it is about 15% slower than an RX 570 4GB and costs $20 more. Latter is a 2 year old card. Not to speak of the RX570 you bought with 2 AAA titles until about late March - early April. Waiting for the green-eyed ones to defend this crap. :D This card is the worst of the 20/16 series along with the RTX 2080 and 2080 Ti regarding price/performance, even the RTX 2070 is along. Only the 1660, 1660 Ti and 2060 makes any sense regarding price/performance.





Nope. None of the 1650s make sense. And there are mini ITX version of the RX570 too (Sapphire Pulse, for example).
Nobody wants a mini-ITX 570. They are too hot for the performance and they still need a power connector. The 1650 has a place where it makes sense, so does the 570. The 570 makes sense unless you need lower heat output and a small PSU and/or no power connectors to your card. AMD has some viable cards in the 570 and Vega 56, but mini-ITX builds in SFF cases with small PSUs is not that use case. You look like an AMD supporter, that's great. Just don't let your biases get in the way of facts. Like the fact that AMD doesn't have a reasonable low-power option and Nvidia does. Most people don't care about low power, but those that do will not get a 570, that's for sure.
 
Joined
May 21, 2009
Messages
24 (0.01/day)
Processor Intel Core i3 8350K Tri-Core @5.0Ghz
Motherboard ASUS Z370-P
Cooling Zalman CNPS 10x Performa+
Memory 8GB DDR4 2400Mhz Mushkin
Video Card(s) Gigabyte Geforce GTX 1050 2GB DDR5 128bits
Storage 2TB
Software Xubuntu 18.04 x64 + Windows 8.1 x64
Joined
May 15, 2014
Messages
102 (0.05/day)
...but price should be 99$ and for RX 570 too
Given BOM of this card, MSRP should indeed be $99. Slug HS with single 2-pin voltage controlled fan, w/o sense. They even deleted the differential grounds from the PCIE connector. RX570 4GB has BOM closer to Asus 1650 Strix MSRP $180. TU117 is an interesting lower power part that could be useful as a single slot card, esp for htpc. Shame NVENC is not Turing gen.
 
Joined
Feb 2, 2016
Messages
21 (0.02/day)
Ah it should be 26%, typo, fixed, thanks!


I assume you mean for the clock vs voltage scatter plot with the blue markers? No way to track "which game"

Speaking of corrections on the opening of the article on -page you state

"The chip is endowed with all of the new 10bpc HDR video decoding hardware acceleration introduced with "Turing", so it has a solid resume for your living room. "

?? is this correct. as this article It is said no Turning NVENC
https://www.techpowerup.com/254861/nvidia-gtx-1650-lacks-turing-nvenc-encoder-packs-voltas-multimedia-engine

Nobody wants a mini-ITX 570. They are too hot for the performance and they still need a power connector. The 1650 has a place where it makes sense, so does the 570. The 570 makes sense unless you need lower heat output and a small PSU and/or no power connectors to your card. AMD has some viable cards in the 570 and Vega 56, but mini-ITX builds in SFF cases with small PSUs is not that use case. You look like an AMD supporter, that's great. Just don't let your biases get in the way of facts. Like the fact that AMD doesn't have a reasonable low-power option and Nvidia does. Most people don't care about low power, but those that do will not get a 570, that's for sure.

Agreed I think its a good card (no PCIE and performance wise) but way overpriced in this current market, I thought it was a gap in AMD's product stack (as the 560 is not comparable) but.. Moving forward I wonder how next gen APU's perform in regards to this product, as this may be the nail in low end turning. This is the game changer i think a lot of system builders are expecting and enthusiasts.
 
Joined
Mar 10, 2014
Messages
1,531 (0.79/day)
Speaking of corrections on the opening of the article on -page you state

"The chip is endowed with all of the new 10bpc HDR video decoding hardware acceleration introduced with "Turing", so it has a solid resume for your living room. "

?? is this correct. as this article It is said no Turning NVENC
https://www.techpowerup.com/254861/nvidia-gtx-1650-lacks-turing-nvenc-encoder-packs-voltas-multimedia-engine




Agreed I think its a good card (no PCIE and performance wise) but way overpriced in this current market, I thought it was a gap in AMD's product stack (as the 560 is not comparable) but.. Moving forward I wonder how next gen APU's perform in regards to this product, as this may be the nail in low end turning. This is the game changer i think a lot of system builders are expecting and enthusiasts.
It has Volta's nvenc and Turing's nvdec, so yes it is correct. It can do actually full 12bpc hw decoding, so it's actually better than W1zzard's says.
 
Top