Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

FirePro M40003 vs GeForce GTX 1650

CPUCPUGPUGPU

FirePro M40003

2012Core: 675 MHz
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz
GTX family
·······
Buy on Amazon

FirePro M40003 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Performance Spectrum

FirePro M40003
4 GB 33
1,364
0.0%
brand logoMobility Radeon HD 5850
brand logoRadeon 6750M
brand logoRadeon R7 M465
brand logoRadeon R9 M270X
brand logoRadeon RX 5500M
brand logoRadeon RX 7600M
brand logoRadeon RX 6600
brand logoRadeon RX 6700 XT
GeForce GTX 1650
4 GB 75
7,869
+476.9%
brand logoGeForce GTX 880M SLI
brand logoGeForce GTX 560 Ti 448
brand logoGeForce GTX 960
brand logoGeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)
brand logoGeForce RTX 3050 OEM
brand logoGeForce GTX 1080
brand logoGeForce RTX 2080 SUPER
brand logoGeForce RTX 3070 Ti

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

FirePro M40003 vs GeForce GTX 1650: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

FirePro M40003

2012

Why buy it

  • ✅Draws 33W instead of 75W, a 42W reduction.
  • ✅Measures 82mm instead of 229mm, a 147mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (1,364 vs 7,869).
  • ❌2012 hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
  • ❌
    0.7% HIGHER MSRP
    $150 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
  • ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 9.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($150 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

  • ✅+476.9% higher PassMark G3D performance.
  • ✅Costs $1 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
  • ✅Delivers 480.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 9.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
  • ✅FirePro M40003 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.

Trade-offs

  • ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
  • ❌127.3% higher power demand at 75W vs 33W.
  • ❌179.3% longer card at 229mm vs 82mm.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 476.9% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 1,364), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 12nm process instead of 28nm and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2012. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $1 cheaper on MSRP at $149 vs $150, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 480.8% (52.8 vs 9.1), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

FirePro M40003 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

AMD

FirePro M40003

The FirePro M40003 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 27 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 675 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,364 points.

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the FirePro M40003 scores 1,364 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 476.9%. The FirePro M40003 is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 512 (FirePro M40003) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.6912 TFLOPS (FirePro M40003) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score
1,364
7,869+477%
Architecture
GCN 1.0
Turing
Process Node
28 nm
12 nm
Shading Units
512
896+75%
Compute (TFLOPS)
0.6912 TFLOPS
2.984 TFLOPS+332%
ROPs
16
32+100%
TMUs
32
56+75%
L1 Cache
128 KB
896 KB+600%
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
1 MB+300%
✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The FirePro M40003 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
Upscaling support
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
Standard
NVIDIA Reflex
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the FirePro M40003 and 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (FirePro M40003) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity
4 GB
4 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
128-bit+100%
L2 Cache
0.25 MB
1 MB+300%
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FirePro M40003) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 3.

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX
12
12
Vulkan
1.2
1.4+17%
OpenGL
4.6
4.6
Max Displays
6+100%
3
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (FirePro M40003) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: UVD 4.0 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (FirePro M40003) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder
VCE 1.0
NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder
UVD 4.0
NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4
H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The FirePro M40003 draws 33W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The FirePro M40003 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro M40003) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 82mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
TDP
33W-56%
75W
Recommended PSU
350W
300W-14%
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
None
Length
82mm
229mm
Height
0mm
111mm
Slots
1-50%
2
Temp (Load)
75°C
70°C-7%
Perf/Watt
41.3
104.9+154%
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FirePro M40003 came in at $150, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce GTX 1650 was 0.7% cheaper ($1 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 9.1 (FirePro M40003) vs 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 480.2% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2012).

FeatureFirePro M40003GeForce GTX 1650
MSRP
$150
$149
Performance per Dollar
9.1
52.8+480%
Codename
Chelsea
TU117
Release
June 27 2012
April 23 2019
Ranking
#752
#323
Search FirePro M40003 on AmazonSearch GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.