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

✅Costs $280 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
✅Delivers 141.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 21.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 9,386).
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 5 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌13.9% longer card at 229mm vs 201mm.

Quadro P2200

2019

Why buy it

✅+19.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅25% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (5 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Measures 201mm instead of 229mm, a 28mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 5 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌
187.9% HIGHER MSRP
$429 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 21.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($429 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Quadro P2200

2019

Why buy it

✅Costs $280 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).
✅Delivers 141.4% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 21.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $429 MSRP).

Why buy it

✅+19.3% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅25% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (5 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Measures 201mm instead of 229mm, a 28mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (7,869 vs 9,386).
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 5 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌13.9% longer card at 229mm vs 201mm.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 5 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌
187.9% HIGHER MSRP
$429 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 21.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($429 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro P2200 better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Quadro P2200 is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 19.3% higher PassMark G3D performance and 5 GB vs 4 GB of VRAM.

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 12nm process instead of 16nm. That makes it the safer long-run choice for modern games.

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

Quadro P2200 is about 187.9% more expensive on MSRP at $429 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 19.3% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium. If you are comfortable paying the premium for the stronger gaming result, Quadro P2200 is the one to buy. If staying closer to budget matters more, GeForce GTX 1650 still makes more sense on price alone, but the performance trade-off is much harder to justify by current standards.

When does GeForce GTX 1650 make more sense than Quadro P2200?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. It makes more sense if your priority is future-proofing and staying closer to $149 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Quadro P2200. The trade-off is that Quadro P2200 currently gives you 19.3% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium.

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 P2200 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
1080p
low	94 FPS	81 FPS
medium	83 FPS	69 FPS
high	70 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	37 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	71 FPS
medium	74 FPS	61 FPS
high	60 FPS	44 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	29 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	25 FPS
medium	39 FPS	24 FPS
high	27 FPS	16 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	14 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P2200

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
1080p
low	136 FPS	156 FPS
medium	113 FPS	120 FPS
high	94 FPS	89 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	61 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	108 FPS
medium	62 FPS	80 FPS
high	44 FPS	61 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	45 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	55 FPS
medium	27 FPS	42 FPS
high	21 FPS	33 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	23 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P2200

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
1080p
low	323 FPS	333 FPS
medium	283 FPS	295 FPS
high	205 FPS	220 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	184 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	249 FPS
medium	202 FPS	225 FPS
high	151 FPS	175 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	163 FPS
medium	117 FPS	141 FPS
high	79 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	60 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P2200

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
1080p
low	261 FPS	147 FPS
medium	211 FPS	120 FPS
high	191 FPS	103 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	105 FPS
medium	158 FPS	86 FPS
high	135 FPS	74 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	61 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	62 FPS
medium	74 FPS	48 FPS
high	65 FPS	38 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	28 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P2200

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro P2200

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 P2200

The Quadro P2200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 10 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1493 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,386 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro P2200's 9,386 — the Quadro P2200 leads by 19.3%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro P2200 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,280 (Quadro P2200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.822 TFLOPS (Quadro P2200). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1493 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
G3D Mark Score	7,869	9,386+19%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	896	1280+43%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	3.822 TFLOPS+28%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+12%	1493 MHz
ROPs	32	40+25%
TMUs	56	80+43%
L1 Cache	896 KB+87%	480 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.25 MB+25%

✨

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 P2200 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
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 Quadro P2200 has 5 GB. The Quadro P2200 offers 25% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.25 MB (Quadro P2200) — the Quadro P2200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	5 GB+25%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	1.25 MB+25%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Quadro P2200). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
DirectX	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 6th Gen NVENC (Quadro P2200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 3rd Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (Quadro P2200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	6th Gen NVENC
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	3rd Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro P2200's 75W — a 0% difference. The Quadro P2200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Quadro P2200). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 201mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P2200
TDP	75W	75W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	201mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C-7%	75°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	125.1+19%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Quadro P2200 launched at $429. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 65.3% less ($280 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 21.9 (Quadro P2200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 141.1% better value.