MSI GeForce GTX 1650 Gaming X 4 GB

[W1zzard]

The GeForce GTX 1650 is NVIDIA's latest Turing release, going head-to-head with AMD's Radeon RX 570. MSI's Gaming X is a premium rendition of this chip with a much improved cooler, idle-fan stop, and large overclock out of the box. Noise levels are amazing and make the card whisper quiet.

Show full review

 

[Kaotik]

Why is VESA Adaptive-sync listed as positive? The card doesn't support it, it supports limited number of Adaptive-sync-displays

 

[W1zzard]

The card doesn't support it, it supports limited number of Adaptive-sync-displays

The "limited number of monitors" are tested by NVIDIA and marked as "compatible". You can still enable Adaptive Sync in the NVIDIA control panel manually, on all FreeSync monitors.

 

[dirtyferret]

I know the reason for the six pin connector is if you want to OC the card but I thought the whole point of these GTX 1650s was for people who just want to stick one into their DELL, ACER, HP, etc., and not worry about swapping out a higher power PSU.

 

[A.Stables]

Thanks for time reviewing, but you should compare the 570 overclocked if its head 2 head ; (and no reference 1650 to compare to either) its not like you've been waiting for drivers or anything. (and the 8gb variant 570 as its same price as this card)

 

[Deleted member 178884]

No wonder nvidia had the drivers nonsense with reviewers, mediocre performance and poor value in comparison to a RX 570.

 

[Rowsol]

Sigh. I was hoping this would be a better value than a 1660 but as I feared, it's not.

 

[dj-electric]

RX 570 4GB models going for less than 130$ on Amazon...

Donno about that one chief. This is a tough sell.

 

[John Naylor]

Have to agree with Wiz's conclusion ... The MSI 1650 overclocked 17% so it kinda "catches" the Sapphire 570 in performance "one might say" ... not me tho as 99% of the time I read such a stament, it does not account for the fact that "the other card can be overclocked too" ..... just not as much as the 570. With both OC'd, the 570 still has a 10% advantage. And while we know w/o looking that it will have the edge in noise (29 / 31 dbA), power (80 / 180 watts) and heat loads (65 / 74 C)> I don't see it as a real attraction as those secondary considerations generally only come into play when performance differences are in single digits and here the 570 maintains a10% edge w/ both cards OC'd.

It's niche if ya can call it that wil be folks without PSUs that provide 6 / 8 pin PCIE cables. Those in areas of high electricity costs should take note. At USA average of $0.11 and 30 hours a week or usage with a Bronze PSU, it will cost an extra $18.42 per year, ($55.26 over 3 years) . I pay $0.24 so for me that's $44.20 a year ($132.60 over 3 years) which makes the card almost free.

So while AMD doesn't have a horse in the race above this level, it would seem they are well positioned to keep this one.

 

[jabbadap]

yeah not a bad card, but that price is just too high for what you get. I'm more curious to see that Palit StormX performance numbers though, than this quite pointless highest end model for such a tiny gpu. @W1zzard apparently does not have any non-OC model either, or?

PS. Sorry to be an constant a**, but Hitman 2 got that dx12 patch on March update.

 

[Deleted member 50521]

RX570 is way better than this. Really pointless card. It should not be priced higher than $100

 

[THANATOS]

No wonder nvidia had the drivers nonsense with reviewers, mediocre performance and poor value in comparison to a RX 570.

Against RX570 you can say everything has a poor value. Not a bad card, but lower cost would be better or higher performance If It had 1024cc instead of 896cc.

 

[jabbadap]

Have to agree with Wiz's conclusion ... The MSI 1650 overclocked 17% so it kinda "catches" the Sapphire 570 in performance "one might say" ... not me tho as 99% of the time I read such a stament, it does not account for the fact that "the other card can be overclocked too" ..... just not as much as the 570. With both OC'd, the 570 still has a 10% advantage. And while we know w/o looking that it will have the edge in noise (29 / 31 dbA), power (80 / 180 watts) and heat loads (65 / 74 C)> I don't see it as a real attraction as those secondary considerations generally only come into play when performance differences are in single digits and here the 570 maintains a10% edge w/ both cards OC'd.

It's niche if ya can call it that wil be folks without PSUs that provide 6 / 8 pin PCIE cables. Those in areas of high electricity costs should take note. At USA average of $0.11 and 30 hours a week or usage with a Bronze PSU, it will cost an extra $18.42 per year, ($55.26 over 3 years) . I pay $0.24 so for me that's $44.20 a year ($132.60 over 3 years) which makes the card almost free.

So while AMD doesn't have a horse in the race above this level, it would seem they are well positioned to keep this one.

Well the whole point of this gpu is on laptops: there it can really shine and I'm kind of sure it will win many design wins on that side of fence...

To seeing that 1080p performance here I'm quite sure nvidia could pair full tu117 with fast gddr6 and very well equal RX 570. But that would probably make it needing 6-pin connector and pushing stock gpu clocks over the optimum.

 

[dirtyferret]

It's niche if ya can call it that wil be folks without PSUs that provide 6 / 8 pin PCIE cables.

but it's not a niche. The GTX 1050ti is the second most popular card on the steam survey (not all of them use a six pin connector) and the GTX 1050 is the third most popular card. Every time I walk into best buy or costco, all I see are prebuilt PC's with the gtx1050. The mass PC vendors will buy these cards up in large quantities as will those people who just want their kid to play fortnite. Yes, DIY builders will pass it up for better cards but obviously not the market Nvidia is targeting with this.

 

[ShurikN]

This card would have made sense if it was powered solely through pcie, as that fills a relatively large market. That would also be a nice advantage over a RX570.
Putting a 6 pin on it while still being slower and more expensive than a 570 is kinda pointless. Would be interesting to see how it performs with default nVidia boost clocks, as those allow 75w max draw.

 

[THANATOS]

RX570 is way better than this. Really pointless card. It should not be priced higher than $100

If It cost only $100, then It would be way better value than RX570, then would RX570 be the pointless card in your eyes? This is not a pointless card, but the cost could be a bit lower.

Many of you say how RX570 is way better because of price/performance but totally ignore It's much higher power consumption. You also need to pay the bill for that higher power consumption and in some countries It's high, so you shouldn't ignore this fact.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Yeah not bad, 90% of the performance of a RX 570 at half it's power consumption is nothing to be sniffed at, but $150+ is a bit too steep.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

Many of you say how RX570 is way better because of price/performance but totally ignore It's much higher power consumption. You also need to pay the bill for that higher power consumption and in some countries It's high, so you shouldn't ignore this fact

Really? If you're that worried about the power consumption I hope you're using expensive TV's and Fridges that are energy efficient too.

 

[THANATOS]

I pay 0.12 euro/KWh so If I play 25 hours per week and 96 W is the difference between the cards during gaming I have to pay 15 euro more per year. If I bought a new card It would stay at least 2-3 years so RX570 would cost me 30-45 euro more on bills!
So I can't say RX570 is so much better than this card(gpu).

 

[danbert2000]

Well I feel better about putting a 570 in my SO's computer. She just wanted to play Civ 6 and clearly the 570 is still ahead. I'm surprised that Nvidia stuck to $150, I guess they're banking on brand and the unique ability to buy a card without power connectors to justify the bump over the more performant card. Also, I guess $130 is not the "typical" price for 570's.

This is going to be quite the laptop chip, though. A nice bump up from the de facto laptop price/performance king that is the 1050 Ti. And I'm guessing they could do a MaxQ version that would make for some impressive battery life during gaming.

 

[3125b]

Too expensive and too slow. A 4GB RX570 is under 120€ over the pond (like 99€ excl. taxes).
The only point of the 1650 is as a 75W heir to the 1050(Ti), and thats not very interesting at peast to me.

 

[THANATOS]

Really? If you're that worried about the power consumption I hope you're using expensive TV's and Fridges that are energy efficient too.

That's not the point and you know It.
You were saying how this card has a mediocre performance and poor value compared to RX570, I just pointed out a big disadvantage of RX570.

Some of you people are hilarious. You care how much you need to pay for a card or If It has the bet perf/price ratio but you totally don't care about how much more you need to pay on bills just to play games on this card.

 

[Deleted member 178884]

You were saying how this card has a mediocre performance and poor value compared to RX570, I just pointed out a big disadvantage of RX570.

My point being it doesn't make a significant impact on your bill, and there's something called undervolting which works best on vega but it's worth a shot on the RX 570 even which will drop power consumption a bit and it still kills the 1650 in performance.

 

[_Flare]

I know the reason for the six pin connector is if you want to OC the card but I thought the whole point of these GTX 1650s was for people who just want to stick one into their DELL, ACER, HP, etc., and not worry about swapping out a higher power PSU.

If you go over 5.5Ampere (66W) 12V with the PCIE-Slot you could fry your Mainboard.
Thats one Reason the GTX 1050 Ti Reference only uses about 51W.

 

[THANATOS]

My point being it doesn't make a significant impact on your bill, and there's something called undervolting which works best on vega but it's worth a shot on the RX 570 even which will drop power consumption a bit and it still kills the 1650 in performance.

If I can buy a faster RX570 for 130euro or GTX1650 for 160euro It looks like a simple choice, but If I add 45 euro to RX570 then It will end up 175 euro vs 160euro and that's not such a simple choice anymore.
Undervolting won't help you to make up the difference of 96W just a part of It and you can't expect everyone to know how to undervolt their card or to bother doing It.