Why does techpowerup have such inaccurate GTX 1650 performance numbers?

[_Flare]

There is obviously a rather big difference in what a GTX 1650 can perform like related to wich limit of the card is reached first wich can differ by game.
A GTX 1650 SUPER is a lot different, it has 15% more shaders, 33% more TDP and 50% higher VRAM bandwidth than the GDDR5 (128GB/s version, but the same 192GB/s than the non-SUPER GDDR6 variants.

TPU tested at least 6 variants of the GTX 1650 non-SUPER (stock Board Power Limit 75W to 85W, max Board Power Limit 75W to 100W) GDDR5 or GDDR6.
Variants with power connectors have better chance for high Power Limits but to be sure just look in the details of the TPU VBios database, it´s a bit work but than your a lot safer.

I played a lot of different games with my GTX1650 GDDR5 without power connector.
my VBios https://www.techpowerup.com/vgabios/219498/219498
Timespy 3765 Graphics Points https://www.3dmark.com/3dm/45975420 OC to Core +150 and VRAM +999
stable gaming was with +120 core and +800 vram

 

[eidairaman1]

Guess what, my GTX 1030 can display a 4K desktop just fine, nice and snappy. Surprisingly good for such an old and slow card. Just don't put it into 3D mode...

You are comparing a card that came out in 2017 to 1 originally from 2012.

I have no 4K monitor for it, so I couldn't tell you.

Got a brand new NEC 21.5" originally fabbed in 2017 using DP, replacing a Samsung 17" LCD that is blury (VGA). It was not cheap either.

Should be easier on the eyes for her

Since most gamers exist in China and India than everywhere else, and their income is much lower than in the West countries, in order to have a PC they need the most basic GPU as this 1650. So, populartity in this case hasn't anything to do with its ability to play modern titles but with its price being low enough to be bought where the vast majority of PC gamers exist.

Hence the RX400 and GTX 1000 user base

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Well, that's not the only incorrect thing. In fact, On the RTX 40 series listing, it shows the 4050 and 4060 with the EXACT same specs. And what is that reason for then?

because they don't exist yet.

GTX 1650 is a great budget card, but it's not a great card, huge difference.

 

[damric]

GTX 1650 poor performance is Raja's fault.

 

[TITAN RTX 4100]

because they don't exist yet.

Well, it's pretty OBVIOUS they won't have the SAME SPECS! No one ever understands anything I say!

 

[Solaris17]

Well, it's pretty OBVIOUS they won't have the SAME SPECS! No one ever understands anything I say!

What are you on about man? Really you need to RELAX. He knows those aren't the specs. As does everyone else. Its just a place holder until it can be updated.

 

[T4C Fantasy]

Well, it's pretty OBVIOUS they won't have the SAME SPECS! No one ever understands anything I say!

because everything you say makes no sense?

the rumored specs change all the time, and when they do I change them.

it clearly states that the specs may change.

 

[qubit]

Well, it's pretty OBVIOUS they won't have the SAME SPECS! No one ever understands anything I say!

Seriously man, I did give you the best advice, to just unsub this thread as it's clearly not working for you, but you won't take it and just continue to cause drama.

@W1zzard explained to you why the thread is still open and gave you one of the nicest replies I've ever seen to a member, but you don't seem to appreciate that. Chill dude, chill.

 

[Deleted member 185158]

Well, it's pretty OBVIOUS they won't have the SAME SPECS! No one ever understands anything I say!

I actually get what you are saying. What IS listed now isn't accurate because the 4050 and 4060 have the same specs.

It may have been just to fill in the blanks, as this may be required by the software in order to fulfill the form for view-ability.

I don't know if that's actually the reason, but it could be something that silly or the algorithm automatically filled the blanks and input user missed it.

But it's kind of you to bring it up, boss man would love to help fix it.

Got any ideas?

 

[_Flare]

Someone didn´t get that the TPU Specsheet of unreleased products have disclaimers and are work in progress!
Now that got clarified in this thread in some very kind ways.
Beside that there are the "most popular steam games" wich minimum and recommended system specs are related to the "most popular GPUs"
those are obviously not 1:1 but somewhat related as i said.
So if the most played games have a price/perf sweetspot near 1050Ti --> 1650 those "most popular" parts will shift over time, with raising demands from updated,old or newly hyped mass played games.
This shift in demanded hardware by "most popular" games combined with the availability of these price/perf sweetspot hardware, obviously makes the "most popular hardware".

I wish you all a calm and peaceful X-MAS

 

[eidairaman1]

I feel this thread has ran its course. Here's the truth you don't have to stay.

 

[kiriakost]

I thought that I am going to read strong debates and found nothing.

I will round all corners by simply reminding that GPU score, this is nothing by itself.
Total PC performance this helps any GPU to give good numbers.

For this class of cards GTX10xx, Unigine Valley Benchmark 1.0 this is the best magnifying glass about overall system 3D performance testing.
1080P and over 100PFS, this is the expectation of most of us with 23” screen.