GRID K520 vs GeForce GTX 1650

GRID K520

2013Core: 745 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GRID K520

225

3,516

0.0%

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

GeForce RTX 2070 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3060 12GB

GeForce RTX 2080 Ti

GeForce GTX 1650

7,869

+123.8%

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 GRID K520 is positioned at rank #350 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower 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 GRID K520

#335

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

15074%

#350

GRID K520

MSRP: $3599|Avg: $50

100%

#351

GRID P40-12Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

99%

#352

FirePro 2270

MSRP: $149|Avg: $30

97%

#353

FirePro 2460

MSRP: $180|Avg: $10

96%

#355

Quadro FX 580

MSRP: $199|Avg: $500

93%

#356

FirePro 3D V5700

MSRP: $599|Avg: $25

93%

#357

GRID M60-1B

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $120

92%

#359

FireStream 9270

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $20

91%

#360

Quadro 400

MSRP: $169|Avg: $500

90%

#361

FirePro 2260

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

90%

#362

Quadro FX 380 LP

MSRP: $169|Avg: $15

88%

#364

Quadro FX 1800

MSRP: $489|Avg: $100

83%

#365

FirePro 3D V8700

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $1229

82%

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 2013). 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 GRID K520 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 123.8% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID K520.

Insight	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-123.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+123.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	Standard Size (267mm)	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 49.2% better value per dollar than the GRID K520.

Insight	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+49.2%)
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($50)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)

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.

GRID K520 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GRID K520 and GeForce GTX 1650

GRID K520

The GRID K520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,516 points. Launch price was $3,599.

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 GRID K520 scores 3,516 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 123.8%. The GRID K520 is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (GRID K520) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 2.289 TFLOPS ×2 (GRID K520) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	3,516	7,869+124%
Architecture	Kepler	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	1536 ×2+71%	896
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.289 TFLOPS ×2	2.984 TFLOPS+30%
ROPs	32 ×2	32
TMUs	128 ×2+129%	56
L1 Cache	128 KB	896 KB+600%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GRID K520 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GRID K520) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GRID K520) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	0	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1 (GRID K520) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: NVDEC 1 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GRID K520) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	NVENC 1	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	NVDEC 1	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID K520 draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID K520) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 267mm vs 229mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 70°C.

Feature	GRID K520	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	225W	75W-67%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	267mm	229mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	2
Temp (Load)	75°C	70°C-7%
Perf/Watt	15.6	104.9+572%

💰

Value Analysis

The GRID K520 launched at $3599 MSRP and currently averages $50, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GRID K520 costs 33.3% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 70.3 (GRID K520) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 49.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).