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.

GeForce 9400M G vs GeForce GTX 1650 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce 9400M G 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.

GeForce 9400M G

2015

Why buy it

✅Costs $99 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
✅Draws 33W instead of 75W, a 42W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 45 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 256 MB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2015 hardware with 256 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($50 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

✅3400.0% more average FPS across 45 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 2709.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 1.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
✅1500% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 256 MB).
✅GeForce 9400M G 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.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 3400.0% in average FPS across 45 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 8271.3% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 94), so the answer here is pretty clean.

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: 4 GB vs 256 MB of VRAM, a 12nm process instead of 28nm, and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2015. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $99 more expensive on MSRP at $149 vs $50, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 2709.2% (52.8 vs 1.9), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce 9400M G vs GeForce GTX 1650 Technical Specifications

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

GeForce 9400M G

The GeForce 9400M G 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: 94 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 9400M G scores 94 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 8271.3%. The GeForce 9400M G is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 9400M G) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 9400M G) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1176 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	94	7,869+8271%
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 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce 9400M G has 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 carries 4 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 1500% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce 9400M G and 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650.

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB	4 GB+1500%
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: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9400M G) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.4. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12+8%
Vulkan	N/A	1.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6+39%
Max Displays	2	3+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 9400M G) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP3) vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce 9400M G) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	None	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo HD (VP3)	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 9400M G draws 33W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 9400M G is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9400M G) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: Legacy vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	33W-56%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	Legacy	None
Length	0mm	229mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75	70°C-7%
Perf/Watt	2.8	104.9+3646%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce 9400M G came in at $50, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce 9400M G was 66.4% cheaper ($99 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 1.9 (GeForce 9400M G) vs 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 2678.9% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2015).

Feature	GeForce 9400M G	GeForce GTX 1650
MSRP	$50-66%	$149
Performance per Dollar	1.9	52.8+2679%
Codename	GM108	TU117
Release	March 13 2015	April 23 2019
Ranking	#847	#323

Search GeForce 9400M G on Amazon

Search 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.