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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro P3000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro P3000 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 10.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $600 MSRP).

Quadro P3000

2016

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 10.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($600 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

2020

Quadro P3000

2016

Why buy it

✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro P3000: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro P3000 is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 50W instead of 250W, a 200W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 10.6 vs 0 G3D/$ ($600 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 10.6 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $600 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Poor future-proofing: 2016-era hardware with 6 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌400% higher power demand at 250W vs 50W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design better than Quadro P3000?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 6,574 vs 6,384 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the overall package: you are getting a newer generation, no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (50W vs 250W).

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2016 and a 12nm process instead of 16nm. That makes it the safer long-run choice for modern games.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the smarter buy by a wide margin. GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $600 MSRP, and you are getting 3.0% higher G3D Mark. Quadro P3000 really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.

Is Quadro P3000 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

No, not for a fresh gaming build. Quadro P3000 is 2016 hardware with 6 GB of VRAM, 6,384 in G3D Mark, and no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That is simply too far behind to be an easy modern recommendation.

Games Benchmarks

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 9800X3D 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

Quadro P3000 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
1080p
low	80 FPS	112 FPS
medium	68 FPS	102 FPS
high	57 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	38 FPS	74 FPS
1440p
low	70 FPS	99 FPS
medium	60 FPS	85 FPS
high	44 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	63 FPS
4K
low	25 FPS	52 FPS
medium	24 FPS	47 FPS
high	16 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	14 FPS	34 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Quadro P3000

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
1080p
low	167 FPS	287 FPS
medium	142 FPS	230 FPS
high	110 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	80 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	122 FPS	212 FPS
medium	99 FPS	172 FPS
high	80 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	59 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	71 FPS	102 FPS
medium	59 FPS	85 FPS
high	47 FPS	73 FPS
ultra	33 FPS	57 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Quadro P3000

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
1080p
low	290 FPS	287 FPS
medium	237 FPS	230 FPS
high	197 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	148 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	222 FPS	215 FPS
medium	177 FPS	172 FPS
high	148 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	111 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	140 FPS	144 FPS
medium	118 FPS	115 FPS
high	84 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	53 FPS	72 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Quadro P3000

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
1080p
low	147 FPS	287 FPS
medium	121 FPS	230 FPS
high	102 FPS	192 FPS
ultra	87 FPS	144 FPS
1440p
low	107 FPS	215 FPS
medium	88 FPS	172 FPS
high	75 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	62 FPS	108 FPS
4K
low	62 FPS	144 FPS
medium	48 FPS	115 FPS
high	38 FPS	96 FPS
ultra	28 FPS	72 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design Open Quadro P3000

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design and Quadro P3000

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.

Quadro P3000

The Quadro P3000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 1 2016. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1506 MHz to 1645 MHz. It has 3840 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,384 points. Launch price was $5,999.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design scores 6,574 and the Quadro P3000 reaches 6,384 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is built on Turing while the Quadro P3000 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3,840 (Quadro P3000). Raw compute: 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12.63 TFLOPS (Quadro P3000). Boost clocks: 1200 MHz vs 1645 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
G3D Mark Score	6,574+3%	6,384
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	1024	3840+275%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.458 TFLOPS	12.63 TFLOPS+414%
Boost Clock	1200 MHz	1645 MHz+37%
ROPs	32	96+200%
TMUs	64	240+275%
L1 Cache	1 MB	1.4 MB+40%
L2 Cache	1 MB	3 MB+200%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Quadro P3000 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro P3000 has 6 GB. The Quadro P3000 offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 3 MB (Quadro P3000) — the Quadro P3000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	6 GB+50%
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	3 MB+200%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro P3000). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.3	1.4+8%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) vs 6th Gen NVENC (Pascal) (Quadro P3000). Decoder: NVDEC (4th Gen) vs 3rd Gen 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,VP9 (Quadro P3000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design	Quadro P3000
Encoder	NVENC (Turing)	6th Gen NVENC (Pascal)
Decoder	NVDEC (4th Gen)	3rd Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit	H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design draws 50W versus the Quadro P3000's 250W — a 133.3% 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 (Quadro P3000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 80°C.