GeForce GTX 280M vs GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce GTX 280M

2008Core: 602 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GeForce GTX 280M

236

576

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB

GeForce GTX 1070 Ti

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce GTX 1650

7,869

+1266.1%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The GeForce GTX 280M is positioned at rank #120 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Balanced cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 280M

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

693%

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

666%

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

658%

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

657%

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

655%

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

652%

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

643%

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

641%

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

635%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

633%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

626%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

624%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

613%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

613%

#84

Radeon Ryzen 5 6600H

MSRP: $350|Avg: $350

94%

#105

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

764%

#120

GeForce GTX 280M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#122

GeForce GTS 450

MSRP: $129|Avg: $20

99%

#123

Radeon HD 8570D

MSRP: $40|Avg: $15

99%

#125

Radeon HD 8650G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

96%

#126

GeForce GT 630

MSRP: $69|Avg: $20

95%

#128

Radeon HD 6770

MSRP: $129|Avg: $129

94%

#129

GeForce GT 440

MSRP: $79|Avg: $40

93%

#130

Radeon R7 340

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

93%

#133

Radeon HD 6750

MSRP: $109|Avg: $109

92%

#135

Radeon R5 240

MSRP: $59|Avg: $10

90%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2008). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 280M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1266.1% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (4 GB vs 1 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 280M.

Insight	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1266.1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1266.1%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

Performance Check

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 7800X3D 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 280M Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 280M and GeForce GTX 1650

GeForce GTX 280M

The GeForce GTX 280M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 16 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 236W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 576 points. Launch price was $649.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 280M scores 576 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 1266.1%. The GeForce GTX 280M is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 65 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 240 (GeForce GTX 280M) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.6221 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 280M) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	576	7,869+1266%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	Turing
Process Node	65 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	240	896+273%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.6221 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+380%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	80+43%	56
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 280M comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 280M) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	1 GB	4 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	128 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 280M) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12+8%
OpenGL	3.3	4.6+39%
Max Displays	2	3+50%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 280M) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 280M) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	PureVideo HD VP2	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP2	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 280M draws 236W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 103.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 280M) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: None vs None. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 280M	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	236W	75W-68%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	None	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	85°C	70°C-18%
Perf/Watt	2.4	104.9+4271%