GeForce GTX 1650 vs GRID K140Q

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 GRID K140Q

#86

Radeon Pro WX 9100

MSRP: $2199|Avg: $550

96%

#87

A10G

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $2000

93%

#88

Tesla T4

MSRP: $1880|Avg: $1000

93%

#89

Tesla M40 24GB

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $120

91%

#90

Quadro P5000

MSRP: $2499|Avg: $400

87%

#182

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

2538%

#197

GRID K140Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $500

100%

#200

Radeon Pro Duo

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $799

95%

#201

P102-100

MSRP: $600|Avg: $80

95%

#203

Quadro FX 2700

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

93%

#206

FirePro V3900

MSRP: $119|Avg: $30

91%

#207

Radeon R7 PRO A10-9700B

MSRP: $119|Avg: $89

91%

#208

Tesla K8

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $100

88%

#210

GRID K240Q

MSRP: $500|Avg: $40

87%

#211

FirePro M4150

MSRP: $200|Avg: $50

87%

#212

FirePro V4900

MSRP: $200|Avg: $47

87%

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 K140Q 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 980.9% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID K140Q.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+980.9%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-980.9%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+700%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	Standard Size (267mm)

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $500 for the GRID K140Q, it costs 85% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 7106% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+7106%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500)

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

GRID K140Q Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GRID K140Q

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.

GRID K140Q

The GRID K140Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 28 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 745 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 728 points. Launch price was $469.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GRID K140Q's 728 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 980.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GRID K140Q uses Kepler, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,536 (GRID K140Q). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.289 TFLOPS (GRID K140Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
G3D Mark Score	7,869+981%	728
Architecture	Turing	Kepler
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1536+71%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+30%	2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	128+129%
L1 Cache	896 KB+600%	128 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
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 GRID K140Q has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (GRID K140Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11_0 (GRID K140Q). Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 0.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
DirectX	12+9%	11_0
Max Displays	3	0

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 3rd Gen (GRID K140Q). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC 1st Gen.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 3rd Gen
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	NVDEC 1st Gen
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	—

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GRID K140Q's 225W — a 100% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GRID K140Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 267mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GRID K140Q
TDP	75W-67%	225W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	267mm
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+3178%	3.2

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GRID K140Q launched at $125 and now averages $500. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 85% less ($425 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.5 (GRID K140Q) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 6893.3% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).