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

✅+83.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 515% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 8.6 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M2200: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M2200 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.
❌36.4% higher power demand at 75W vs 55W.

Quadro M2200

2017

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 75W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (4,294 vs 7,869).
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
235.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.6 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Quadro M2200

2017

Why buy it

✅+83.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Delivers 515% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 8.6 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $500 MSRP).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Quadro M2200: it remains the more sensible modern option while Quadro M2200 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 75W, a 20W 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.
❌36.4% higher power demand at 75W vs 55W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (4,294 vs 7,869).
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2017-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌
235.6% HIGHER MSRP
$500 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.6 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($500 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 1650 better than Quadro M2200?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is clearly the better overall GPU here. You are also looking at 7,869 vs 4,294 in G3D Mark. On top of that, GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while Quadro M2200 is a 2017 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 2017, 83.3% 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 $351 cheaper on MSRP at $149 MSRP versus $500 MSRP, and you are getting 83.3% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 515%. That is why the better overall card still comes out as the smarter buy today, not just the faster one.

Is Quadro M2200 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. Quadro M2200 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

Quadro M2200 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
1080p
low	94 FPS	78 FPS
medium	83 FPS	66 FPS
high	70 FPS	53 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	35 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	68 FPS
medium	74 FPS	59 FPS
high	60 FPS	41 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	26 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	24 FPS
medium	39 FPS	23 FPS
high	27 FPS	15 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro M2200

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
1080p
low	136 FPS	79 FPS
medium	113 FPS	56 FPS
high	94 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	27 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	45 FPS
medium	62 FPS	29 FPS
high	44 FPS	22 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	15 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	17 FPS
medium	27 FPS	11 FPS
high	21 FPS	9 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	6 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro M2200

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
1080p
low	323 FPS	193 FPS
medium	283 FPS	155 FPS
high	205 FPS	129 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	97 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	145 FPS
medium	202 FPS	116 FPS
high	151 FPS	97 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	72 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	97 FPS
medium	117 FPS	77 FPS
high	79 FPS	64 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	48 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro M2200

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
1080p
low	261 FPS	143 FPS
medium	211 FPS	112 FPS
high	191 FPS	95 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	78 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	103 FPS
medium	158 FPS	84 FPS
high	135 FPS	71 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	57 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	61 FPS
medium	74 FPS	46 FPS
high	65 FPS	36 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	27 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro M2200

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro M2200

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 M2200

The Quadro M2200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 695 MHz to 1036 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,294 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro M2200's 4,294 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 83.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro M2200 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,024 (Quadro M2200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.122 TFLOPS (Quadro M2200). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1036 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
G3D Mark Score	7,869+83%	4,294
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1024+14%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+41%	2.122 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+61%	1036 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	64+14%
L1 Cache	896 KB+133%	384 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 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 Quadro M2200 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
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 GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M2200). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M2200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 2nd Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,HEVC (Quadro M2200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	2nd Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro M2200's 55W — a 30.8% difference. The Quadro M2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Quadro M2200). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 80°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M2200
TDP	75W	55W-27%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-13%	80°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+34%	78.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Quadro M2200 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 8.6 (Quadro M2200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 514% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).