GRID P40-24Q vs GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

GRID P40-24Q

2015Core: 557 MHzBoost: 1178 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

2020Core: 1350 MHzBoost: 1485 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GRID P40-24Q

225

7,057

+1.3%

GeForce GTX 570

GeForce GTX 580

GeForce GTX 570 Rev. 2

GeForce MX570 A

GeForce GTX 980

GeForce RTX 2080 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 5060 Ti

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

6,968

0.0%

RTX 2000 Ada Generation Mobile

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop GPU

GeForce RTX 5060 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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GRID P40-24Q is positioned at rank 338 and the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is on rank 50, so the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

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 P40-24Q

#117

L40

MSRP: $31000|Avg: $8174

85%

#323

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

11914%

#338

GRID P40-24Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $200

100%

#339

Quadro 4000

MSRP: $1199|Avg: $30

99%

#340

FireStream 9250

MSRP: $999|Avg: $49

94%

#341

GRID P40-3Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

93%

#342

GRID M10-2Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $150

87%

#343

Tesla K80

MSRP: $5000|Avg: $50

86%

#344

GRID M10-4Q

MSRP: $2805|Avg: $340

85%

#346

GRID M10-8Q

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $500

84%

#347

Quadro FX 3800

MSRP: $799|Avg: $20

83%

#348

FirePro V8700

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $170

83%

#350

GRID K520

MSRP: $3599|Avg: $50

79%

#351

GRID P40-12Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

78%

#352

FirePro 2270

MSRP: $149|Avg: $30

77%

#353

FirePro 2460

MSRP: $180|Avg: $10

76%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

#16

Radeon RX 7600S

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

100%

#40

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

187%

#42

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

169%

#43

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

169%

#47

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

154%

#48

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

153%

#50

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $75

100%

#53

GeForce GTX 980M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $80

97%

#54

GeForce GTX 770M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

96%

#58

GeForce 770M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

93%

#62

Radeon 820M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $25

92%

#65

GeForce GTX 1650 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

91%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID P40-24Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GRID P40-24Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% 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 (Mobile).

Insight	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%)
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 (+0%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	Standard Size (267mm)	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $200 for the GRID P40-24Q, it costs 63% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 163.3% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+163.3%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($200)	✅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 P40-24Q Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GRID P40-24Q and GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

GRID P40-24Q

The GRID P40-24Q 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: 7,057 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1350 MHz to 1485 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,968 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID P40-24Q scores 7,057 and the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) reaches 6,968 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID P40-24Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID P40-24Q) vs 3.041 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1485 MHz.

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
G3D Mark Score	7,057+1%	6,968
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	2048+100%	1024
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.825 TFLOPS+59%	3.041 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1178 MHz	1485 MHz+26%
ROPs	64+100%	32
TMUs	128+100%	64
L1 Cache	0.75 MB	1 MB+33%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID P40-24Q) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) — the GRID P40-24Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR6	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
DirectX	12.0	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.1	1.3+18%
OpenGL	4.5	4.6+2%
Max Displays	0	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 4.0 (GRID P40-24Q) vs NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP7 vs NVDEC 4th Gen. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9 (GRID P40-24Q) vs H.264,H.265,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)).

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
Encoder	NVENC 4.0	NVENC 6th Gen (Volta/Turing)
Decoder	PureVideo HD VP7	NVDEC 4th Gen
Codecs	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9	H.264,H.265,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID P40-24Q draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)'s 50W — a 127.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID P40-24Q) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 267mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots.

Feature	GRID P40-24Q	GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)
TDP	225W	50W-78%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	267mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	—	87
Perf/Watt	31.4	139.4+344%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) costs 62.5% less ($125 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 35.3 (GRID P40-24Q) vs 92.9 (GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)) — the GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) offers 163.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile) is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).