GeForce GTX 1650 vs Iris Pro Graphics 5200

Performance Spectrum - GPU

GeForce GTX 1650

75

7,869

+571.4%

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

Iris Pro Graphics 5200

30

1,172

0.0%

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.

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 Iris Pro Graphics 5200

#392

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1390%

#394

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1260%

#395

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1257%

#399

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1143%

#400

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1135%

#402

Mobility Radeon HD 5000

MSRP: $99|Avg: $20

100%

#403

Iris Pro Graphics 5200

MSRP: $150|Avg: $40

100%

#405

Radeon RX Vega 10 Ryzen 7 3700C

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

99%

#406

Radeon HD 8650G + 7700M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

96%

#407

Radeon R9 M290X Crossfire

MSRP: $800|Avg: $200

96%

#408

GeForce GTX 285M SLI

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

94%

#409

Radeon R7 M260X

MSRP: $139|Avg: $35

93%

#410

Radeon HD 8570D + HD 6570 Dual

MSRP: $120|Avg: $25

93%

#411

Intel UHD Graphics 615

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

92%

#412

Radeon R7 A365

MSRP: $109|Avg: $55

92%

#413

Radeon 3015e

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

92%

#414

Radeon HD 7620G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

91%

#415

Radeon R9 M390X

MSRP: $550|Avg: $120

91%

#416

Arc 8-Core iGPU

MSRP: $503|Avg: $400

89%

#417

Mobility Radeon HD 4670

MSRP: $67|Avg: $20

88%

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 Iris Pro Graphics 5200 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 571.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (4 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Iris Pro Graphics 5200.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+571.4%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-571.4%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Generation 7.5 (2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100+%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $40), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 258.1% better value per dollar than the Iris Pro Graphics 5200.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+258.1%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($40)

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

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Iris Pro Graphics 5200

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200

The Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in May 27 2013. It features the Generation 7.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 200 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 22 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,172 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Iris Pro Graphics 5200's 1,172 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 571.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 uses Generation 7.5, both on 12 nm vs 22 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 320 (Iris Pro Graphics 5200). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.768 TFLOPS (Iris Pro Graphics 5200). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1200 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
G3D Mark Score	7,869+571%	1,172
Architecture	Turing	Generation 7.5
Process Node	12 nm	22 nm
Shading Units	896+180%	320
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+289%	0.768 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+39%	1200 MHz
ROPs	32+700%	4
TMUs	56+40%	40

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
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 Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs System.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	System
Bus Width	128-bit	System

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Iris Pro Graphics 5200's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1W (Iris Pro Graphics 5200). Power connectors: None vs Integrated.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Iris Pro Graphics 5200
TDP	75W	30W-60%
Recommended PSU	300W	1W-100%
Power Connector	None	Integrated
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+168%	39.1

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Iris Pro Graphics 5200 launched at $150 and now averages $40. The Iris Pro Graphics 5200 costs 46.7% less ($35 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 29.3 (Iris Pro Graphics 5200) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 258% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).