
FirePro W8100 vs GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

FirePro W8100
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The FirePro W8100 is positioned at rank 254 and the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is on rank 50, so the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar FirePro W8100
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is significantly newer (2020 vs 2014). The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro W8100 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the FirePro W8100 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $200 for the FirePro W8100, it costs 63% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 172.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+172.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200) | ✅More affordable ($75) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of FirePro W8100 and GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

FirePro W8100
The FirePro W8100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 23 2014. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 824 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 220W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,812 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1485 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,968 points.
Graphics Performance
The FirePro W8100 scores 6,812 and the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) reaches 6,968 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The FirePro W8100 is built on GCN 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (FirePro W8100) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Raw compute: 4.219 TFLOPS (FirePro W8100) vs 3.041 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,812 | 6,968+2% |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+150% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.219 TFLOPS+39% | 3.041 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 160+150% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 0.63 MB | 1 MB+59% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The FirePro W8100 comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) has 4 GB. The FirePro W8100 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (FirePro W8100) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 6 vs 3.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.3+8% |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 6+100% | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (FirePro W8100) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Decoder: UVD 4.2 vs NVDEC 4th Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC (FirePro W8100) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing) |
| Decoder | UVD 4.2 | NVDEC 4th Gen |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2,MVC | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The FirePro W8100 draws 220W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)'s 50W — a 125.9% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (FirePro W8100) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 87°C vs 87.
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 220W | 50W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 241mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 87°C | 87 |
| Perf/Watt | 31.0 | 139.4+350% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) costs 62.5% less ($125 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.1 (FirePro W8100) vs 92.9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) — the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers 172.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2014).
| Feature | FirePro W8100 | GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $2499 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $200 | $75-63% |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.1 | 92.9+172% |
| Codename | Hawaii | TU116 |
| Release | June 23 2014 | April 23 2020 |
| Ranking | #361 | #324 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















