NVIDIA's new GTX 1650 is built around the TU117, their smallest graphics processor. It features all the improvements of the Turing architecture, like larger caches, concurrent execution of float and integer operations, and adaptive/variable-rate shading. What's missing (like on all the other GeForce 16-series cards) is support for RTX real-time raytracing and DLSS, which have been removed to save on chip area, reducing cost.

ASUS overclocked their card out of the box to a rated boost clock of 1830 MHz, which is a little bit less than the highest GTX 1650 cards (EVGA XC Ultra is the highest with 1875 MHz), but the differences are kinda small. What's surprising is that, compared to the MSI GTX 1650 Gaming X, which is clocked at 1860 MHz rated boost, the ASUS card seems to be a little bit faster (around 1%) even though the rated boost value would suggest it should be slower. We properly tested average GPU clock for both cards; the MSI ran at 1941 MHz average, while the ASUS card ran at 1978 MHz, which confirms that observation. Memory isn't overclocked on the ASUS STRIX even though the chips can certainly take it as our manual overclocking results show. Averaged over all our benchmarks at 1080p, the ASUS GTX 1650 STRIX OC is 37% faster than the GTX 1050 Ti and 8% behind the Radeon RX 570. This makes the card 10% slower than even the GTX 1060 3 GB and 24% slower than the GTX 1060 6 GB, and puts it a whopping 47% behind the GTX 1660 (the next step up in the Turing product stack). This is strong evidence NVIDIA will release a GTX 1650 Ti to fill that hole in their lineup. With those performance levels, the GTX 1650 is not good enough for 60 FPS gaming at 1080p with highest details, but you should be able reach that FPS rate in most games with reduced details.

The ASUS heatsink is a large dual-slot, dual-fan design that does an outstanding job at keeping the card cool. With only 64°C at load, the card runs very cool and extremely quietly at the same time. Gaming noise levels of 28 dBA mean the card will be inaudible in any case as long as there is another actively cooled component. Typically, we see such noise levels from cards running in idle, sitting on the desktop—the ASUS STRIX achieves these noise levels during gaming! ASUS also includes the highly popular fan-stop feature which shuts the fans off completely during idle, Internet browsing, and light gaming. With those noise levels, the card will make an excellent candidate for a low-noise living room computer. Unlike other cards tested today, ASUS did manage to squeeze in a metal backplate, which definitely improves look and feel and also helps protect the card against damage. Another useful feature is a fan header that lets you connect a case fan to your graphics card, and it'll run at the same speed as the card's own fans, which should help with noise when not gaming, while still providing airflow when the card is heavily loaded.

Like all other Turing GPUs, power efficiency of the ASUS GTX 1650 is excellent. Compared to cards like the GTX 1660 and GTX 1660 Ti, gaming power efficiency is further improved, by another 10% or so, which by itself is a pretty amazing achievement. Compared to AMD's Radeon RX 570, the difference is almost unbelievable—the ASUS GTX 1650 STRIX is almost 2.5x as power efficient as the RX 570. No wonder it has better noise and thermals. Power draw during gaming is also very well behaved and reaches only 67 W, which ensures that any power supply will be able to handle this card. Unlike the NVIDIA reference design, which uses PCIe slot power only, ASUS has added an additional 6-pin power connector and raised the board power limit. While the power input configuration allows for up to 150 W power draw in theory, ASUS has set their power limit to 85 W, which isn't that much higher than the 75 W of the reference design. We do see the card peak at 87 W in Furmark, so the 6-pin does have some use.

You can find the ASUS GTX 1650 STRIX OC online for $179, which is a $30 increase over the NVIDIA MSRP of $150 (or 20%). I would say that increase is a little bit much, $20 would be more reasonable. Either way, you get a much better cooler, idle-fan-stop, overclock out of the box, and a backplate. The bigger problem with pricing is NVIDIA's MSRP, which is simply too high when compared to competing options. AMD's Radeon RX 570 can be found online for $130 and offers significantly higher performance. A more realistic price point for the GTX 1650 would be $120, at which point it would achieve price/performance parity with the Radeon RX 570. Compared to RX 570, the GTX 1650 definitely wins with impressive power efficiency and better temperature and noise levels, but pricing is just too high for that to matter. It also faces strong competition from NVIDIA's own GTX 1060 series, which offers similar or better performance and can be found used for bargain prices. Another competitor is the GTX 1660, which is faster and actually has a better price/performance ratio than the GTX 1650.