GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 6200

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 6200

#724

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

37438%

#726

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

33938%

#727

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

33848%

#731

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

30779%

#732

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

30569%

#734

GeForce 6200

MSRP: $129|Avg: $10

100%

#736

GeForce FX 5500

MSRP: $37|Avg: $30

76%

#737

RADEON 9500

MSRP: $179|Avg: $30

69%

#738

MOBILITY RADEON 9800

MSRP: $229|Avg: $25

69%

#739

RADEON X850 XT

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

55%

#740

RADEON 9800

MSRP: $399|Avg: $399

52%

#742

RADEON 9000

MSRP: $49|Avg: $20

34%

#743

RADEON 9200 SE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $15

34%

#744

MOBILITY RADEON 7500

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

28%

#745

MOBILITY RADEON 9200

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

21%

#746

MOBILITY RADEON 9000

MSRP: $50|Avg: $5

21%

#747

GeForce4 MX 420

MSRP: $99|Avg: $10

17%

#748

RADEON 9250

MSRP: $79|Avg: $25

14%

#749

RADEON 9200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $25

14%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 21167.6% higher G3D Mark score and 1500% more VRAM (4 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 6200.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+21167.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-21167.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+1500%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $10), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 2735.7% better value per dollar than the GeForce 6200.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+2735.7%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($10)

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 1650 Benchmark Check

GeForce 6200 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce 6200

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.

GeForce 6200

The GeForce 6200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 37 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce 6200's 37 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 21167.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce 6200 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (GeForce 6200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 6200). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
G3D Mark Score	7,869+21168%	37
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+274%	0.7972 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+60%	1038 MHz
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	56+133%	24
L1 Cache	896 KB+522%	144 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 6200 has 256 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1500% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+1500%	0.25 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 9.0c (GeForce 6200). Vulkan: 1.4 vs None. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
DirectX	12+33%	9.0c
Vulkan	1.4	None
OpenGL	4.6+119%	2.1
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs No (GeForce 6200). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce 6200).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	No
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce 6200's 10W — a 152.9% difference. The GeForce 6200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce 6200). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 168mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 65°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 6200
TDP	75W	10W-87%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	229mm	168mm
Height	111mm	100mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C	65°C-7%
Perf/Watt	104.9+2735%	3.7

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce 6200 launched at $129 and now averages $10. The GeForce 6200 costs 86.7% less ($65 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 3.7 (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 2735.1% better value.