GRID M60-8Q vs GeForce GTX 1650

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

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. 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 M60-8Q 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 102.6% 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 M60-8Q.

Insight	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-102.6%)	✅Leading raw performance (+102.6%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	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	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $500 for the GRID M60-8Q, it costs 85% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 1250.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1250.7%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500)	✅More affordable ($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 M60-8Q Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GRID M60-8Q and GeForce GTX 1650

GRID M60-8Q

The GRID M60-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,884 points.

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 M60-8Q scores 3,884 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 102.6%. The GRID M60-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID M60-8Q) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID M60-8Q) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1665 MHz.

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	3,884	7,869+103%
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2048+129%	896
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.825 TFLOPS+62%	2.984 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1178 MHz	1665 MHz+41%
ROPs	64+100%	32
TMUs	128+129%	56
L1 Cache	768 KB	896 KB+17%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	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 M60-8Q 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: 2 MB (GRID M60-8Q) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GRID M60-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID M60-8Q draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M60-8Q) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	225W	75W-67%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	—	2
Temp (Load)	—	70°C
Perf/Watt	17.3	104.9+506%

💰

Value Analysis

The GRID M60-8Q launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 85% less ($425 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 7.8 (GRID M60-8Q) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1244.9% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).