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

✅+19.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $5,550 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
✅Delivers 4481.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 1.2 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID P40-3Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID P40-3Q is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 75W instead of 225W, a 150W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

GRID P40-3Q

2013

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (6,570 vs 7,869).
❌Poor future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
3724.8% HIGHER MSRP
$5,699 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.2 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($5,699 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌200% higher power demand at 225W vs 75W.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

GRID P40-3Q

2013

Why buy it

✅+19.8% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $5,550 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
✅Delivers 4481.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 1.2 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $5,699 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than GRID P40-3Q: it remains the more sensible modern option while GRID P40-3Q is already legacy-tier future-proofing.
✅Draws 75W instead of 225W, a 150W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (6,570 vs 7,869).
❌Poor future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already a legacy-tier option for modern games.
❌
3724.8% HIGHER MSRP
$5,699 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 1.2 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($5,699 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌200% higher power demand at 225W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than GRID P40-3Q?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 7,869 vs 6,570 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 1650 is the overall package: you are getting a newer generation, no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (75W vs 225W).

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, 19.8% more raw performance headroom, and a 12nm process instead of 28nm. That extra performance headroom should help it hold higher settings and newer game demands for longer.

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 $5,550 cheaper on MSRP at $149 MSRP versus $5,699 MSRP, and you are getting 19.8% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 4481.1%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is GRID P40-3Q still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GRID P40-3Q 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 $5,699 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 P40-3Q Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
1080p
low	94 FPS	103 FPS
medium	83 FPS	89 FPS
high	70 FPS	70 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	42 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	90 FPS
medium	74 FPS	79 FPS
high	60 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	32 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	29 FPS
medium	39 FPS	27 FPS
high	27 FPS	18 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	16 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID P40-3Q

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
1080p
low	136 FPS	111 FPS
medium	113 FPS	78 FPS
high	94 FPS	57 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	39 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	72 FPS
medium	62 FPS	49 FPS
high	44 FPS	37 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	27 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	36 FPS
medium	27 FPS	25 FPS
high	21 FPS	20 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	14 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID P40-3Q

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
1080p
low	323 FPS	296 FPS
medium	283 FPS	237 FPS
high	205 FPS	197 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	148 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	222 FPS
medium	202 FPS	177 FPS
high	151 FPS	148 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	111 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	148 FPS
medium	117 FPS	118 FPS
high	79 FPS	99 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	74 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID P40-3Q

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
1080p
low	261 FPS	166 FPS
medium	211 FPS	133 FPS
high	191 FPS	117 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	90 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	121 FPS
medium	158 FPS	99 FPS
high	135 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	62 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	70 FPS
medium	74 FPS	54 FPS
high	65 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	29 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open GRID P40-3Q

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GRID P40-3Q

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 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

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GRID P40-3Q's 6,570 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 19.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GRID P40-3Q uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,536 (GRID P40-3Q). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID P40-3Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
G3D Mark Score	7,869+20%	6,570
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 P40-3Q relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GRID P40-3Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (11_0) (GRID P40-3Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
DirectX	12	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Tesla NVENC x24 (GRID P40-3Q). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs Tesla NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC (GRID P40-3Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	Tesla NVENC x24
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	Tesla NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GRID P40-3Q's 225W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GRID P40-3Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID P40-3Q
TDP	75W-67%	225W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+259%	29.2

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the GRID P40-3Q launched at $5699. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 97.4% less ($5550 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.2 (GRID P40-3Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 4300% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).