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 $4,500 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $4,649 MSRP).
✅Delivers 977% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 4.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $4,649 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 300W, a 225W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX A6000 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 48 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.

Quadro RTX A6000

2020

Why buy it

✅243.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (48 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Ampere on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌
3020.1% HIGHER MSRP
$4,649 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($4,649 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 300W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Quadro RTX A6000

2020

Why buy it

✅Costs $4,500 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $4,649 MSRP).
✅Delivers 977% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 4.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $4,649 MSRP).
✅Draws 75W instead of 300W, a 225W reduction.
✅Measures 229mm instead of 267mm, a 38mm shorter card that is more SFF-friendly.

Why buy it

✅243.8% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅1100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (48 GB vs 4 GB).
✅More future proof: Ampere on 8nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX A6000 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 48 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.

Trade-offs

❌
3020.1% HIGHER MSRP
$4,649 MSRPvs$149 MSRP
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 4.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($4,649 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌300% higher power demand at 300W vs 75W.
❌16.6% longer card at 267mm vs 229mm.

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro RTX A6000 better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Quadro RTX A6000 is clearly the better overall GPU here. Quadro RTX A6000 averages 243.8% more FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. You are also looking at 22,798 vs 7,869 in G3D Mark. On top of that, Quadro RTX A6000 is a 2020 card with no meaningful modern upscaling stack, while GeForce GTX 1650 is a 2019 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?

Quadro RTX A6000 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer 2020 generation instead of 2019, 189.7% more raw performance headroom, more VRAM at 48 GB instead of 4 GB, and 100.0% more ray-tracing hardware. That leaves it with more room for heavier textures, tougher ray tracing loads, and higher-end 1440p or 4K gaming over the next few years.

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

Quadro RTX A6000 is about 3020.1% more expensive on MSRP at $4,649 MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 243.8% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 189.7% 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 RTX A6000 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.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. This mostly comes down to price. If you want to stay closer to $149 MSRP, it remains a strong choice; if you are comfortable paying more, Quadro RTX A6000 earns that extra money with a clearly stronger gaming result and a more complete overall package.

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 RTX A6000 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
1080p
low	94 FPS	270 FPS
medium	83 FPS	250 FPS
high	70 FPS	209 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	183 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	257 FPS
medium	74 FPS	214 FPS
high	60 FPS	167 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	150 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	175 FPS
medium	39 FPS	144 FPS
high	27 FPS	104 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	93 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX A6000

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
1080p
low	136 FPS	661 FPS
medium	113 FPS	555 FPS
high	94 FPS	420 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	361 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	489 FPS
medium	62 FPS	417 FPS
high	44 FPS	331 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	261 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	255 FPS
medium	27 FPS	220 FPS
high	21 FPS	188 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	158 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX A6000

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
1080p
low	323 FPS	929 FPS
medium	283 FPS	759 FPS
high	205 FPS	675 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	513 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	716 FPS
medium	202 FPS	586 FPS
high	151 FPS	509 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	493 FPS
medium	117 FPS	408 FPS
high	79 FPS	342 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	256 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX A6000

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
1080p
low	261 FPS	855 FPS
medium	211 FPS	784 FPS
high	191 FPS	684 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	513 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	679 FPS
medium	158 FPS	616 FPS
high	135 FPS	513 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	385 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	489 FPS
medium	74 FPS	410 FPS
high	65 FPS	342 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	256 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX A6000

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro RTX A6000

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 RTX A6000

The Quadro RTX A6000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 5 2020. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 1410 MHz to 1800 MHz. It has 10752 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 84 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 22,798 points. Launch price was $4,649.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro RTX A6000's 22,798 — the Quadro RTX A6000 leads by 189.7%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro RTX A6000 uses Ampere, both on 12 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10,752 (Quadro RTX A6000). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 38.71 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX A6000). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1800 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
G3D Mark Score	7,869	22,798+190%
Architecture	Turing	Ampere
Process Node	12 nm	8 nm
Shading Units	896	10752+1100%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	38.71 TFLOPS+1197%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz	1800 MHz+8%
ROPs	32	112+250%
TMUs	56	336+500%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	10.5 MB+1093%
L2 Cache	1 MB	6 MB+500%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	Upscaling support
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX A6000 has 48 GB. The Quadro RTX A6000 offers 1100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 768 GB/s (Quadro RTX A6000) — a 500% advantage for the Quadro RTX A6000. Bus width: 128-bit vs 384-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 6 MB (Quadro RTX A6000) — the Quadro RTX A6000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	48 GB+1100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	768 GB/s+500%
Bus Width	128-bit	384-bit+200%
L2 Cache	1 MB	6 MB+500%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Quadro RTX A6000). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
DirectX	12	12 Ultimate
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC (7th Gen) (Quadro RTX A6000). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC (5th Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (Quadro RTX A6000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC (7th Gen)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	NVDEC (5th Gen)
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro RTX A6000's 300W — a 120% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Quadro RTX A6000). Power connectors: None vs 8-pin EPS. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX A6000
TDP	75W-75%	300W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	8-pin EPS
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85
Perf/Watt	104.9+38%	76.0

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP, while the Quadro RTX A6000 launched at $4649. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 96.8% less ($4500 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.9 (Quadro RTX A6000) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 977.6% better value. The Quadro RTX A6000 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2019).