GeForce 410M vs GeForce GTX 1650

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. The GeForce 410M is positioned at rank #56 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 410M

#19

Radeon RX 5600

MSRP: $229|Avg: $150

95%

#46

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

200%

#48

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

182%

#49

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

181%

#53

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

165%

#54

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

164%

#56

GeForce 410M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#58

GeForce 770M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

100%

#62

Radeon 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

99%

#65

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

97%

#66

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

97%

#68

GeForce GTX 850M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 410M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2803.7% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 410M.

Insight	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2803.7%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2803.7%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+700%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

GeForce 410M Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 410M and GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce 410M

The GeForce 410M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 271 points.

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 GeForce 410M scores 271 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 2803.7%. The GeForce 410M is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 410M) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 410M) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1176 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	271	7,869+2804%
Architecture	Maxwell	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	384	896+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.9032 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+230%
Boost Clock	1176 MHz	1665 MHz+42%
ROPs	8	32+300%
TMUs	24	56+133%
L1 Cache	192 KB	896 KB+367%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
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 GeForce 410M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	4 GB+700%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.0 (GeForce 410M) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	11.0	12+9%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	2	3+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 410M) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 410M) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	None	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo VP4	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 410M draws 33W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 410M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 410M) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Legacy vs None. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce 410M	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	33W-56%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Legacy	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	1-50%	2
Temp (Load)	80°C	70°C-13%
Perf/Watt	8.2	104.9+1179%