GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro P520

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 P520

#58

RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1700

98%

#59

Radeon Vega Frontier Edition

MSRP: $999|Avg: $150

94%

#60

Radeon Pro WX 8200

MSRP: $999|Avg: $350

93%

#62

RTX A4500

MSRP: $1699|Avg: $800

92%

#63

RTX 4500 Ada Generation

MSRP: $2250|Avg: $2000

91%

#64

RTX 4000 Ada Generation

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1547

89%

#96

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

1089%

#111

Quadro P520

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

100%

#113

Radeon Pro WX 3100

MSRP: $199|Avg: $65

96%

#117

Radeon Pro 580X

MSRP: $600|Avg: $200

93%

#118

Radeon Pro WX 2100

MSRP: $149|Avg: $45

93%

#119

CMP 40HX

MSRP: $699|Avg: $120

92%

#124

Radeon Pro W5500X

MSRP: $599|Avg: $500

90%

#125

Quadro T2000

MSRP: $600|Avg: $75

89%

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 286.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P520.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P520
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+286.9%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-286.9%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $150 for the Quadro P520, it costs 50% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 673.7% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P520
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+673.7%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅More affordable ($75)	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150)

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 P520 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro P520

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 P520

The Quadro P520 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 23 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1303 MHz to 1493 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 18W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,034 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro P520's 2,034 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 286.9%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro P520 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (Quadro P520). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1.147 TFLOPS (Quadro P520). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1493 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P520
G3D Mark Score	7,869+287%	2,034
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+160%	1.147 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+12%	1493 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	Quadro P520
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)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (Quadro P520) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P520
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro P520's 18W — a 122.6% difference. The Quadro P520 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Quadro P520). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P520
TDP	75W	18W-76%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9	113.0+8%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Quadro P520 launched at $150 and now averages $150. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 50% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 13.6 (Quadro P520) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 671.3% better value.