Synthetic Benchmarks

As always I like to start off my testing with a few synthetic benchmarks. 3DMark especially is one of my favorites because it is very optimized in both Nvidia and AMD drivers. It's nice to not have to worry about it being favored too much either way and the repeatability of the results makes it a nice chance to compare from card to card. To start things off I tested in 3DMark with the DX11 focused Fire Strike benchmarks which test three different detail levels. The Turing based Nvidia cards haven’t liked these tests as much as the Time Spy benchmark but you can see still a huge jump in performance between the GTX 1650 SUPER and the overclocked original GTX 1650. It shows in all three of the tests and you can see that the new SUPER is closer to the GTX 1660 than the GTX 1650.  

graph1

graph2

graph3

While still in 3DMark but with the newer Tim Spy benchmarks which are DX12, you can see how the GTX 1650 SUPER is now running with the RX580 almost perfectly in both the normal detail and the extreme test. This still puts it below the RX590 but you can see how it lands between the GTX 1650 and the GTX 1660.

graph4

graph5

I wanted to also run the Ray Tracing benchmark but while officially supported the GTX 1650 still didn’t have the power to run the test so it failed. That left me with the last benchmark the Superposition test which is based on the Unigine engine. Here I tested twice at 1080p, once at the medium detail and again at the extreme detail. At the medium detail, the GTX 1650 SUPER didn’t do to bad. Once again running right with the RX580 and with a big jump up over the original GTX 1650.

graph6

 

Log in to comment

We have 687 guests and one member online

supportus