
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
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 GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is positioned at rank 5 and the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is on rank 65, so the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1125 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,314 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,309 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q scores 6,314 and the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design reaches 6,309 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 2.304 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1125 MHz vs 1200 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,314 | 6,309 |
| Architecture | Turing | Turing |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024 | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.304 TFLOPS | 2.458 TFLOPS+7% |
| Boost Clock | 1125 MHz | 1200 MHz+7% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 112 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs NVDEC (4th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (Turing) | NVENC (Turing) |
| Decoder | NVDEC (4th Gen) | NVDEC (4th Gen) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q draws 30W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design's 50W — a 50% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: Mobile vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-40% | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Mobile | PCIe-powered |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 210.5+67% | 126.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $100 |
| Codename | TU117 | TU117 |
| Release | April 23 2019 | April 2 2020 |
| Ranking | #383 | #371 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















