GeForce GTX 1650 Ti vs Quadro P4000 (móvel)
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Popular choices:
Quadro P4000 (móvel)
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Performance Per Dollar Quadro P4000 (móvel)
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P4000 (móvel).
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| 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
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti holds the technical lead. Priced at $77 (vs $290), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 277.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+277.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($77) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($290) |
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 Ti and Quadro P4000 (móvel)
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 9 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 928 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,525 points. Launch price was $149.
Quadro P4000 (móvel)
The Quadro P4000 (móvel) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1227 MHz to 1228 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,500 points. Launch price was $819.61.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti scores 7,525 and the Quadro P4000 (móvel) reaches 7,500 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is built on Kepler while the Quadro P4000 (móvel) uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 1,792 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)). Raw compute: 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 4.398 TFLOPS (Quadro P4000 (móvel)).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,525 | 7,500 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 16 nm |
| Shading Units | 768 | 1792+133% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.425 TFLOPS | 4.398 TFLOPS+209% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 64 | 112+75% |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 672 KB+950% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 2 MB (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) — the Quadro P4000 (móvel) has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 256-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro P4000 (móvel)). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 3 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs NVENC (6th Gen) (Quadro P4000 (móvel)). Decoder: NVDEC 4 vs NVDEC (3rd Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6 (Volta) | NVENC (6th Gen) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4 | NVDEC (3rd Gen) |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 | H.264,H.265,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti draws 50W versus the Quadro P4000 (móvel)'s 100W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 350W (Quadro P4000 (móvel)). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-50% | 100W |
| Recommended PSU | 0W-100% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 150.5+101% | 75.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $77, while the Quadro P4000 (móvel) launched at $819 and now averages $290. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 73.4% less ($213 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) vs 25.9 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 277.2% better value. The Quadro P4000 (móvel) is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti | Quadro P4000 (móvel) |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150-82% | $819 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $77-73% | $290 |
| Performance per Dollar | 97.7+277% | 25.9 |
| Codename | GK106 | GP104 |
| Release | October 9 2012 | January 11 2017 |
| Ranking | #633 | #326 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 1650 Ti and Quadro P4000 (móvel)
