GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design vs GRID P40-3Q

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 Ti with Max-Q Design is positioned at rank 160 and the GRID P40-3Q is on rank 341, so the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

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 Ti with Max-Q Design

#42

Radeon RX 6600S

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

98%

#43

Radeon RX 8060S

MSRP: $500|Avg: $500

97%

#47

Radeon RX 6700S

MSRP: $479|Avg: $300

95%

#150

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

329%

#152

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

298%

#153

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

297%

#157

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

270%

#158

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

268%

#160

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#172

GeForce GT 540M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $30

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GRID P40-3Q

#117

L40

MSRP: $31000|Avg: $8174

91%

#326

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

12846%

#341

GRID P40-3Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

100%

#342

GRID M10-2Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $150

94%

#343

Tesla K80

MSRP: $5000|Avg: $50

93%

#344

GRID M10-4Q

MSRP: $2805|Avg: $340

92%

#346

GRID M10-8Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $500

90%

#347

FirePro V8700

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $170

90%

#348

Quadro FX 3800

MSRP: $799|Avg: $20

90%

#350

GRID K520

MSRP: $3599|Avg: $50

85%

#351

GRID P40-12Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

84%

#352

FirePro 2270

MSRP: $149|Avg: $30

83%

#353

FirePro 2460

MSRP: $180|Avg: $10

82%

#355

FirePro 3D V5700

MSRP: $599|Avg: $25

79%

#356

Quadro FX 580

MSRP: $199|Avg: $500

79%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID P40-3Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design 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 GRID P40-3Q.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.1%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.1%)
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	—	Standard Size (267mm)

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design 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 Ti with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

GRID P40-3Q Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and GRID P40-3Q

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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: 6,574 points.

GRID P40-3Q

The GRID P40-3Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,570 points. Launch price was $469.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the GRID P40-3Q reaches 6,570 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the GRID P40-3Q uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 1,536 (GRID P40-3Q). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID P40-3Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
G3D Mark Score	6,574	6,570
Architecture	Turing	Kepler
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1024	1536+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS+7%	2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64	128+100%
L1 Cache	1 MB+669%	0.13 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
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 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 0.5 MB (GRID P40-3Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (11_0) (GRID P40-3Q). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.3	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs Tesla NVENC x24 (GRID P40-3Q). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs Tesla NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs H.264,HEVC (GRID P40-3Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	Tesla NVENC x24
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	Tesla NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the GRID P40-3Q's 225W — a 127.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 350W (GRID P40-3Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	GRID P40-3Q
TDP	50W-78%	225W
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	—	267mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	75°C-12%	85°C
Perf/Watt	131.5+350%	29.2