GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2

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 GTX 1650 Max-Q is positioned at rank #5 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Excellent 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 GTX 1650 Max-Q

#5

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#6

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

100%

#8

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

90%

#9

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

90%

#13

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

82%

#14

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

81%

#18

Radeon RX 560X (móvel)

MSRP: $55|Avg: $55

80%

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 Max-Q is significantly newer (2019 vs 2013). The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% 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 Max-Q.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%)	✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))
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 780 Rev. 2 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 GTX 1650 Max-Q Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2

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 780 Rev. 2

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 10 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 863 MHz to 902 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,500 points. Launch price was $649.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q scores 6,314 and the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 reaches 6,500 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is built on Turing while the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 2,304 (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2). Raw compute: 2.304 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 4.156 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2). Boost clocks: 1125 MHz vs 902 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
G3D Mark Score	6,314	6,500+3%
Architecture	Turing	Kepler
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	2304+125%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.304 TFLOPS	4.156 TFLOPS+80%
Boost Clock	1125 MHz+25%	902 MHz
ROPs	32	48+50%
TMUs	64	192+200%
L1 Cache	1 MB+426%	0.19 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
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. Memory bandwidth: 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 288 GB/s (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) — a 157.1% advantage for the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) — the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	112 GB/s	288 GB/s+157%
Bus Width	128-bit	384-bit+200%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.5 MB+50%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q draws 30W versus the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2's 250W — a 157.1% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) vs 600W (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2). Power connectors: Mobile vs 6-pin + 8-pin.