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

2019

Why buy it

✅+209.7% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 939.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID K240Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID K240Q is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌22800% longer card at 229mm vs 1mm.

GRID K240Q

2013

Why buy it

✅Measures 1mm instead of 229mm, a 228mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (2,541 vs 7,869).
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
235.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

GRID K240Q

2013

Why buy it

✅+209.7% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 939.2% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 5.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID K240Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID K240Q is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Why buy it

✅Measures 1mm instead of 229mm, a 228mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌22800% longer card at 229mm vs 1mm.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (2,541 vs 7,869).
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
235.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 5.1 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than GRID K240Q?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 7,869 vs 2,541 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while GRID K240Q is a 2013 model from an older generation with no meaningful modern upscaling stack. So this is not really a tight same-tier comparison. It is more a modern card against an older, weaker alternative.

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

GeForce GTX 1650 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2019 generation instead of 2013, 209.7% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 4 GB instead of 2 GB, and a 12nm process instead of 28nm. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

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

GeForce GTX 1650 is the smarter buy today, but it is not as lopsided as a simple winner label makes it sound. GeForce GTX 1650 is about $351 cheaper on MSRP at $149 MSRP versus $500 MSRP, and you are getting 209.7% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 939.2%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is GRID K240Q still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GRID K240Q is still a strong modern gaming GPU: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It remains a good buy when you can get it meaningfully cheaper than the alternative around $500 MSRP, even if GeForce GTX 1650 is still the cleaner recommendation on overall value today.

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 Benchmark Check

GRID K240Q Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
1080p
low	94 FPS	102 FPS
medium	83 FPS	83 FPS
high	70 FPS	65 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	38 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	85 FPS
medium	74 FPS	69 FPS
high	60 FPS	50 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	28 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	28 FPS
medium	39 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	17 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	15 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID K240Q

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
1080p
low	136 FPS	88 FPS
medium	113 FPS	62 FPS
high	94 FPS	48 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	32 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	48 FPS
medium	62 FPS	31 FPS
high	44 FPS	23 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	17 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	18 FPS
medium	27 FPS	12 FPS
high	21 FPS	9 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	7 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID K240Q

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
1080p
low	323 FPS	114 FPS
medium	283 FPS	91 FPS
high	205 FPS	76 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	57 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	86 FPS
medium	202 FPS	69 FPS
high	151 FPS	57 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	43 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	57 FPS
medium	117 FPS	46 FPS
high	79 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	29 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID K240Q

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
1080p
low	261 FPS	114 FPS
medium	211 FPS	91 FPS
high	191 FPS	76 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	57 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	86 FPS
medium	158 FPS	69 FPS
high	135 FPS	57 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	43 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	57 FPS
medium	74 FPS	46 FPS
high	65 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	29 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID K240Q

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GRID K240Q

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

GRID K240Q

The GRID K240Q 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: 2,541 points. Launch price was $469.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GRID K240Q's 2,541 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 209.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GRID K240Q uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,536 (GRID K240Q). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K240Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
G3D Mark Score	7,869+210%	2,541
Architecture	Turing	Kepler
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1536+71%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+30%	2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	128+129%
L1 Cache	896 KB+600%	128 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The GRID K240Q relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
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 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GRID K240Q has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GRID K240Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11_0 (GRID K240Q). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
DirectX	12+9%	11_0
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GRID K240Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	—
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	—
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GRID K240Q's 225W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GRID K240Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 1mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K240Q
TDP	75W-67%	225W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	1mm
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+828%	11.3

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the GRID K240Q launched at $500. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 70.2% less ($351 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.1 (GRID K240Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 935.3% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).