Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review

Up Close

Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review

Up Close

There isn't much obvious difference in the packaging between the various models Gigabyte have released in the GTX 1650 range, so if you want this particular version pay close attention to the left hand corner of the box.

Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  

It's nice to see that even though the GTX 1650 is very much a value offering Gigabyte haven't completely ignored the chance to extract a little more cooling performance and thus GPU Boost ability from it. Whereas the stock card has a single fan the OC 4G has a dual fan arrangement with a relatively meaty heatsink.


Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  

Such is the cool nature and efficient power requirements of the GTX 1650 the OC 4G only needs a mid-sized heatsink. It's still a step up from the Nvidia reference design and on that small PCB is guaranteed to fit in almost any case you care to name.


Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  
Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  
Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  

Outputs are handled by two HDMI and a single DisplayPort. It's a minimalist aesthetic and we're surprised not to see a DVI connector given how this card is aimed squarely at the people who can only afford to upgrade rarely and thus might have an older display.


Gigabyte GTX 1650 OC 4G Review  

«Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next»

Most Recent Comments

01-05-2019, 13:58:32

AngryGoldfish
I'm kind of torn whether reviewers should focus on the unique card itself—the shroud, the fans, the quality, etc—or the GPU. On the one hand pretty much all shrouds and designs manufactured today by the likes of EVGA and Powercolor are adequate, and what distinguishes them from one another is usually a mere few degrees or a few decibels. Pay more, get more bling, get more cooling. Pay less, get less bling, get less cooling. It's quite simple really. So reviewing them on that merit seems like a tedious almost inconsequential thing, and instead reviewing it on the GPU itself would be more apt. But then once you've reviewed it you shouldn't have to review it again since performance will be the same.

I think your method of focusing on the card and not the GPU is fairest. I'm more in favour of that.Quote

01-05-2019, 14:59:48

WYP
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish View Post
I'm kind of torn whether reviewers should focus on the unique card itself—the shroud, the fans, the quality, etc—or the GPU. On the one hand pretty much all shrouds and designs manufactured today by the likes of EVGA and Powercolor are adequate, and what distinguishes them from one another is usually a mere few degrees or a few decibels. Pay more, get more bling, get more cooling. Pay less, get less bling, get less cooling. It's quite simple really. So reviewing them on that merit seems like a tedious almost inconsequential thing, and instead reviewing it on the GPU itself would be more apt. But then once you've reviewed it you shouldn't have to review it again since performance will be the same.

I think your method of focusing on the card and not the GPU is fairest. I'm more in favour of that.
It's a tricky thing, as ultimately there are two ways to look at it. As reviewers, we need to inform people whether or not a graphics card is a good implementation of a specific GPU and whether or not that GPU is the best graphics card at its price point.

I think it says a lot that Nvidia didn't give reviewers pre-launch drivers for the GTX 1650. Ultimately, the pricing problem is an Nvidia problem, but you can't really say that Gigabyte made a bad card here.

The GTX 1650 is a very interesting card, especially when considering it as a low power HTPC GPU, or as part as an ultra-compact system with relatively little airflow. This is a great card for throwing into an old OEM PC that needs a decent low power GPU for PC gaming.Quote

03-05-2019, 09:51:44

tinytomlogan
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngryGoldfish View Post
I'm kind of torn whether reviewers should focus on the unique card itself—the shroud, the fans, the quality, etc—or the GPU. On the one hand pretty much all shrouds and designs manufactured today by the likes of EVGA and Powercolor are adequate, and what distinguishes them from one another is usually a mere few degrees or a few decibels. Pay more, get more bling, get more cooling. Pay less, get less bling, get less cooling. It's quite simple really. So reviewing them on that merit seems like a tedious almost inconsequential thing, and instead reviewing it on the GPU itself would be more apt. But then once you've reviewed it you shouldn't have to review it again since performance will be the same.

I think your method of focusing on the card and not the GPU is fairest. I'm more in favour of that.

Ive just finished retesting an RX570 (had to get AMD to send one, all my originals went back to vendors)

So we will have a GPU focused review next weekQuote
Reply
x

Register for the OC3D Newsletter

Subscribing to the OC3D newsletter will keep you up-to-date on the latest technology reviews, competitions and goings-on at Overclock3D. We won't share your email address with ANYONE, and we will only email you with updates on site news, reviews, and competitions and you can unsubscribe easily at any time.

Simply enter your name and email address into the box below and be sure to click on the links in the confirmation emails that will arrive in your e-mail shortly after to complete the registration.

If you run into any problems, just drop us a message on the forums.