13 specifications

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980

On paper, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 has more shading units, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 has a wider memory bus. Shading-unit counts are not directly comparable across different architectures, so read that row as context rather than a verdict. Specifications describe what each card is designed to do; how much of that either one holds under continuous load is a separate question.

10 specifications · 4 with a higher side

Full specifications

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

NVIDIA · GeForce GTX 16 · Desktop

Full specifications

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980

NVIDIA · GeForce GTX 900 · Desktop

Compute

Architecture

Turing

Maxwell

Shading units

1,280

2,048

Base clock

1530 MHz

1126 MHz

Boost clock

1725 MHz

1216 MHz

Memory

4 GB

Memory type

GDDR6

GDDR5

Memory bus

128-bit

256-bit

Power and platform

TDP

100 W

165 W

Process

Not verified

Launched

2019-11-22

2014-09-18

A check marks the higher figure only on rows where higher is unambiguously better. Rows without one are not ties; they are specifications where “better” has no meaning.

Reading the table

What the difference means.

5 years apart

The GTX 1650 SUPER (Turing, 2019) is 5 years newer than the GTX 980 (Maxwell, 2014). A newer architecture brings more than speed: newer video encoders and decoders, newer upscaling and frame generation, and a longer run of driver updates ahead of it.

Video memory

Both carry 4 GB, so neither has the advantage where memory is the limit: high resolutions, heavy textures and local AI models fill both at the same point.

Memory bus

The GTX 980 moves data over a 256-bit bus of GDDR5; the GTX 1650 SUPER uses 128-bit GDDR6. The bus width and the memory type together set how fast the chip can reach its own memory, which shows at high resolutions where every frame moves more data. A narrow bus with fast memory can match a wide one with slow memory, so neither figure settles it alone.

Shading units

The counts differ, 2,048 against 1,280, but these are different designs, and a shading unit on one is not the same amount of work as on the other. The row cannot be used to rank this pair.

Board power

The GTX 980 draws up to 165 W against 100 W. That is heat the case has to exhaust and current the power supply has to deliver: allow a supply of about 550 W for the GTX 980 with a typical processor, and check the card's power connectors against the supply's. A card that cannot shed its heat does not fail. It lowers its clocks after a few minutes, which is the frame rate that falls the longer you play.

Which to pick, on paper

A small case or a modest power supply: GTX 1650 SUPER; 100 W against 165 W: less heat, fewer power connectors, quieter fans.

What no table says

How much of its speed a graphics card keeps after the first minute depends on the cooling and the power limit of the machine it is in. If you own one of these, measure it: the test is free and runs in this browser.

Free GPU stress test

Questions

Is the GTX 1650 SUPER better than the GTX 980?: By need, on the specifications: a small case or a modest power supply: the GTX 1650 SUPER. They are different designs, so the raw counts cannot rank them. Frame rates depend on the game and its settings, and how much speed either card keeps after ten minutes depends on its cooling, which is what a sustained test measures.
What power supply does the GTX 980 need?: Allow about 550 W with a typical processor, and make sure the supply has the power connectors the card uses. The GTX 1650 SUPER at 100 W is easier on both.

More comparisons

Every figure on this table is a design target. None of it is a measurement.

Nothing above describes how a graphics card behaves twenty minutes into a sustained workload, which is where two chips with nearly identical specifications routinely diverge. A boost clock is a ceiling the vendor permits, not a rate the chip sustains, and whether it holds depends on the cooling, the case, the power profile and the room. None of those appear on a specification sheet.

We deliberately do not reduce these figures to a single score. A composite invented from specifications would look authoritative and measure nothing, and choosing the weights would be choosing the winner.

Run the test on your machine How we measure →