
GeForce GTX 1650

Quadro FX 3700M
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro FX 3700M Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro FX 3700M FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro FX 3700M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce GTX 1650
2019Why buy it
- ✅689.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 1 GB).
- ✅Quadro FX 3700M is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 189W, a 114W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
Quadro FX 3700M
2008Why buy it
- ✅Competitive enough if your priority is price, power, or specific feature preference.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 1 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2008 hardware with 1 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ❌152% higher power demand at 189W vs 75W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro FX 3700M Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

Quadro FX 3700M
The Quadro FX 3700M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 451 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro FX 3700M's 451 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 1644.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro FX 3700M uses Tesla 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 240 (Quadro FX 3700M). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 3700M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,869+1645% | 451 |
| Architecture | Turing | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 896+273% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.984 TFLOPS+380% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 56 | 80+43% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Quadro FX 3700M leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 3700M carries 1 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the Quadro FX 3700M. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 3700M) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+300% | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11 (10_0) (Quadro FX 3700M). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12+9% | 11 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 3+50% | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs No (Quadro FX 3700M). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Quadro FX 3700M).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) | No |
| Decoder | NVDEC 4th gen | PureVideo VP2 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro FX 3700M's 189W — a 86.4% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Quadro FX 3700M). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-60% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 300W-14% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 229mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 70°C-18% | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 104.9+4271% | 2.4 |
Value Analysis
The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 1650 | Quadro FX 3700M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Codename | TU117 | GT200B |
| Release | April 23 2019 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #323 | #815 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















