FireStream 9250 vs GeForce GTX 1650
We compared two Desktop platform GPUs: 1024MB VRAM FireStream 9250 and 4GB VRAM GeForce GTX 1650 to see which GPU has better performance in key specifications, benchmark tests, power consumption, etc.
Main Differences
GeForce GTX 1650 's Advantages
Released 10 years and 10 months late
Boost Clock1665MHz
More VRAM (4GB vs 1024GB)
Larger VRAM bandwidth (128.1GB/s vs 63.55GB/s)
96 additional rendering cores
Lower TDP (75W vs 150W)
Score
Benchmark
FP32 (float)
FireStream 9250
1000
GeForce GTX 1650
+198%
2984
Graphics Card
Jun 2008
Release Date
Apr 2019
FireStream
Generation
GeForce 16
Desktop
Type
Desktop
PCIe 2.0 x16
Bus Interface
PCIe 3.0 x16
Clock Speeds
-
Base Clock
1485 MHz
-
Boost Clock
1665 MHz
993 MHz
Memory Clock
2001 MHz
Memory
1024MB
Memory Size
4GB
GDDR3
Memory Type
GDDR5
256bit
Memory Bus
128bit
63.55GB/s
Bandwidth
128.1GB/s
Render Config
10
Compute Units
-
-
SM Count
14
800
Shading Units
896
40
TMUs
56
16
ROPs
32
16 KB (per CU)
L1 Cache
64 KB (per SM)
256 KB
L2 Cache
1024 KB
Theoretical Performance
10.00 GPixel/s
Pixel Rate
53.28 GPixel/s
25.00 GTexel/s
Texture Rate
93.24 GTexel/s
-
FP16 (half)
5.967 TFLOPS
1000 GFLOPS
FP32 (float)
2.984 TFLOPS
200.0 GFLOPS
FP64 (double)
93.24 GFLOPS
Board Design
150W
TDP
75W
450 W
Suggested PSU
250 W
1x DVI
Outputs
1x DVI
1x HDMI 2.0
1x DisplayPort 1.4a
1x 6-pin
Power Connectors
None
Graphics Processor
RV770
GPU Name
TU117
RV770 PRO
GPU Variant
TU117-300-A1
TeraScale
Architecture
Turing
TSMC
Foundry
TSMC
55 nm
Process Size
12 nm
0.956 billion
Transistors
4.7 billion
256 mm²
Die Size
200 mm²
Graphics Features
10.1 (10_1)
DirectX
12 (12_1)
3.3
OpenGL
4.6
1.1
OpenCL
3.0
N/A
Vulkan
1.3
-
CUDA
7.5
4.1
Shader Model
6.6