GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro M4000

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 Quadro M4000

#74

RTX 5000 Ada Generation

MSRP: $4000|Avg: $4095

90%

#75

Radeon Pro Vega II

MSRP: $2199|Avg: $1800

84%

#76

Radeon PRO W7900

MSRP: $3999|Avg: $3500

84%

#77

Radeon Pro VII

MSRP: $1899|Avg: $1400

83%

#144

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

1750%

#159

Quadro M4000

MSRP: $791|Avg: $350

100%

#160

FirePro W4100

MSRP: $183|Avg: $183

97%

#166

FirePro W5100

MSRP: $399|Avg: $50

89%

#167

Radeon Pro WX 4170

MSRP: $400|Avg: $120

85%

#168

FirePro W4300

MSRP: $379|Avg: $50

85%

#169

Quadro K2200

MSRP: $500|Avg: $40

85%

#173

Radeon R7 PRO A8-9600

MSRP: $119|Avg: $86

83%

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 Quadro M4000 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 17.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro M4000 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+17.8%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-17.8%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
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. Priced at $75 versus $350 for the Quadro M4000, it costs 79% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 449.8% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+449.8%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($350)

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

Quadro M4000 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro M4000

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.

Quadro M4000

The Quadro M4000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 18 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 975 MHz to 1013 MHz. It has 1,280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,679 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro M4000's 6,679 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 17.8%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro M4000 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1 (Quadro M4000). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.496 TFLOPS (Quadro M4000). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1013 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
G3D Mark Score	7,869+18%	6,679
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1,280+43%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+20%	2.496 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+64%	1013 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	80+43%
L1 Cache	896 KB+87%	480 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
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 Quadro M4000 has 8 GB. The Quadro M4000 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 128 GB/s (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 211 GB/s (Quadro M4000) — a 64.8% advantage for the Quadro M4000. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (Quadro M4000) — the Quadro M4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	211 GB/s+65%
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 (12_1) (Quadro M4000). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
DirectX	12	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4	1.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell) (Quadro M4000). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs 1st Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro M4000).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	5th Gen NVENC (Maxwell)
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	1st Gen NVDEC
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro M4000's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Quadro M4000). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 241mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 82°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro M4000
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	241mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C-15%	82°C
Perf/Watt	104.9+57%	66.8

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Quadro M4000 launched at $791 and now averages $350. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 78.6% less ($275 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 19.1 (Quadro M4000) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 449.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).