GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro K4200

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz
GTX family
·······
VS
NVIDIA

Quadro K4200

2014Core: 771 MHzBoost: 784 MHz
Similar parts

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro K4200 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 K4200 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.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro K4200: 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

2019

Why buy it

  • 53.6% 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).
  • Quadro K4200 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
  • Draws 75W instead of 108W, a 33W reduction.
  • Measures 229mm instead of 241mm, a 12mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

  • Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

Quadro K4200

2014

Why 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.
  • 2014 hardware with 4 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).
  • 44% higher power demand at 108W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 53.6% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 81.6% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 4,332), so the answer here is pretty clean.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: a 12nm process instead of 28nm and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2014. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro K4200 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

NVIDIA

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.

NVIDIA

Quadro K4200

The Quadro K4200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 771 MHz to 784 MHz. It has 1344 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 108W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,332 points. Launch price was $854.99.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro K4200's 4,332 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 81.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro K4200 uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,344 (Quadro K4200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.107 TFLOPS (Quadro K4200). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 784 MHz.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
G3D Mark Score
7,869+82%
4,332
Architecture
Turing
Kepler
Process Node
12 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
896
1344+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)
2.984 TFLOPS+42%
2.107 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1665 MHz+112%
784 MHz
ROPs
32
32
TMUs
56
112+100%
L1 Cache
896 KB+700%
112 KB
L2 Cache
1 MB+100%
0.5 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Quadro K4200 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
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 ship with 4 GB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 64-bit on the Quadro K4200. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (Quadro K4200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
VRAM Capacity
4 GB
4 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 12_0 (Quadro K4200). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 3.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
DirectX
12
12_0
Max Displays
3
3
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 2nd Gen (Quadro K4200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC 1st Gen.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
Encoder
NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
NVENC 2nd Gen
Decoder
NVDEC 4th gen
NVDEC 1st Gen
Codecs
H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro K4200's 108W — a 36.1% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Quadro K4200). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
TDP
75W-31%
108W
Recommended PSU
300W-14%
350W
Power Connector
None
PCIe-powered
Length
229mm
241mm
Height
111mm
Slots
2
1-50%
Temp (Load)
70°C
Perf/Watt
104.9+162%
40.1
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Quadro K4200 launched at $0. On MSRP, Quadro K4200 was 100+% cheaper ($149 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs Infinity (Quadro K4200) — the Quadro K4200 offers Infinity% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2014).

FeatureGeForce GTX 1650Quadro K4200
MSRP
$149
$0-100%
Performance per Dollar
52.8
Infinity
Codename
TU117
GK104
Release
April 23 2019
July 22 2014
Ranking
#323
#475

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.