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

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro P5200 Max-Q across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Quadro P5200 Max-Q

2018

Why buy it

✅33.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Quadro P5200 Max-Q

2018

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 100W, a 25W reduction.
✅More future proof: Turing (2018−2022) on 12nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Why buy it

✅33.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro P5200 Max-Q across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.

Trade-offs

❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌33.3% higher power demand at 100W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro P5200 Max-Q better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Quadro P5200 Max-Q is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 33.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 56.4% higher PassMark G3D performance. It also comes from 2018 instead of 2019, which helps its case as the more complete modern gaming card.

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 2018 and 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 P5200 Max-Q is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 33.4% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 56.4% 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 P5200 Max-Q 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 P5200 Max-Q?

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 newer architecture, lower power draw (75W vs 100W), future-proofing, and staying closer to $149 MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of Quadro P5200 Max-Q. The trade-off is that Quadro P5200 Max-Q currently gives you 56.4% higher G3D Mark and 33.4% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. 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 P5200 Max-Q Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
1080p
low	94 FPS	109 FPS
medium	83 FPS	99 FPS
high	70 FPS	84 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	71 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	96 FPS
medium	74 FPS	82 FPS
high	60 FPS	68 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	59 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	49 FPS
medium	39 FPS	43 FPS
high	27 FPS	35 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	31 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P5200 Max-Q

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
1080p
low	136 FPS	242 FPS
medium	113 FPS	205 FPS
high	94 FPS	160 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	126 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	166 FPS
medium	62 FPS	140 FPS
high	44 FPS	115 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	91 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	96 FPS
medium	27 FPS	79 FPS
high	21 FPS	68 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	52 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P5200 Max-Q

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
1080p
low	323 FPS	501 FPS
medium	283 FPS	430 FPS
high	205 FPS	363 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	277 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	399 FPS
medium	202 FPS	332 FPS
high	151 FPS	277 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	208 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	243 FPS
medium	117 FPS	201 FPS
high	79 FPS	157 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	120 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P5200 Max-Q

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
1080p
low	261 FPS	299 FPS
medium	211 FPS	237 FPS
high	191 FPS	208 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	178 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	233 FPS
medium	158 FPS	185 FPS
high	135 FPS	158 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	132 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	120 FPS
medium	74 FPS	93 FPS
high	65 FPS	84 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	68 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro P5200 Max-Q

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro P5200 Max-Q

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 P5200 Max-Q

The Quadro P5200 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1316 MHz to 1569 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,308 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro P5200 Max-Q's 12,308 — the Quadro P5200 Max-Q leads by 56.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro P5200 Max-Q uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,560 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.033 TFLOPS (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1569 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
G3D Mark Score	7,869	12,308+56%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	896	2560+186%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	8.033 TFLOPS+169%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+6%	1569 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	160+186%
L1 Cache	896 KB	960 KB+7%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

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 P5200 Max-Q relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
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 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (Quadro P5200 Max-Q) — the Quadro P5200 Max-Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6+2%	4.5
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 5.0 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP7. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro P5200 Max-Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 5.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP7
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro P5200 Max-Q's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	123.1+17%