GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

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. 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

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

#5

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#6

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

100%

#8

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

90%

#9

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

90%

#13

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

82%

#14

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

81%

#18

Radeon RX 560X (móvel)

MSRP: $55|Avg: $55

80%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is significantly newer (2019 vs 2013). The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q.

Insight	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 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 780 Rev. 2 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 and GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 10 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 863 MHz to 902 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,500 points. Launch price was $649.

GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1125 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,314 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 scores 6,500 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q reaches 6,314 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,304 (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q). Raw compute: 4.156 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) vs 2.304 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 902 MHz vs 1125 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
G3D Mark Score	6,500+3%	6,314
Architecture	Kepler	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2304+125%	1024
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.156 TFLOPS+80%	2.304 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	902 MHz	1125 MHz+25%
ROPs	48+50%	32
TMUs	192+200%	64
L1 Cache	0.19 MB	1 MB+426%
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Memory bandwidth: 288 GB/s (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) vs 112 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) — a 157.1% advantage for the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2. Bus width: 384-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q) — the GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2	GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Memory Bandwidth	288 GB/s+157%	112 GB/s
Bus Width	384-bit+200%	128-bit
L2 Cache	1.5 MB+50%	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2 draws 250W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q's 30W — a 157.1% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 600W (GeForce GTX 780 Rev. 2) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs Mobile.