Performance comparison: which is faster?
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (NVIDIA, 2019) and GeForce GTX 980 (NVIDIA, 2015) are compared here. Compare scores and VRAM, generative AI usability, and CPUs that pair well with each GPU.
Overall performance: GTX 1650 SUPER is about 6% faster
Both have 4GB of VRAM, so they support a similar range of generative AI models. For gaming, prioritize performance score and CPU compatibility; for AI, prioritize VRAM.
Relative performance score (higher is faster). Actual fps varies by resolution, game, and CPU configuration.
| Item | GTX 1650 SUPER | GTX 980 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance Score | 8,800 | 8,300 |
| VRAM | 4GB | 4GB |
| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Series | GTX 16 | GTX 900 |
| Release Year | 2019 | 2015 |
| Compatible CPU Example | Ryzen 3 2200G | Ryzen 3 1300X |
| If You Want To... | Recommended |
|---|---|
| Prioritize high fps and smooth performance in demanding games | GTX 1650 SUPER |
| Run larger generative AI and LLM models | GTX 1650 SUPER |
| Prioritize value and adequate performance | GTX 980 (the lower model is often sufficient) |
GTX 1650 SUPER is about 6% higher by score (GTX 1650 SUPER: 8800 points / GTX 980: 8300 points). Actual fps also varies by resolution, game, and CPU, so price is a reasonable deciding factor when the gap is only a few percent.
Both have 4GB of VRAM, so the range of generative AI models they can run is nearly the same.
Using our guideline, Ryzen 3 2200G pairs well with GTX 1650 SUPER and Ryzen 3 1300X with GTX 980 (CPU:GPU ≈ 0.9:1). If the CPU is too weak, replacing the GPU may not raise fps, so check the combination before buying.
