GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro P5200 Max-Q

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 P5200 Max-Q

#1

Quadro P5200 Max-Q

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#9

Intel Arc Pro B50

MSRP: $349|Avg: $349

43%

#11

Quadro RTX 4000 (móvel)

MSRP: $900|Avg: $300

41%

#16

Radeon PRO W7500

MSRP: $429|Avg: $401

38%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro P5200 Max-Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 56.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 1650.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-56.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+56.4%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro P5200 Max-Q remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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 P5200 Max-Q Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro P5200 Max-Q

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 P5200 Max-Q

The Quadro P5200 Max-Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 21 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1316 MHz to 1569 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 12,308 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Quadro P5200 Max-Q's 12,308 — the Quadro P5200 Max-Q leads by 56.4%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro P5200 Max-Q uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 16 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,560 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 8.033 TFLOPS (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1569 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
G3D Mark Score	7,869	12,308+56%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	16 nm
Shading Units	896	2560+186%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	8.033 TFLOPS+169%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+6%	1569 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	160+186%
L1 Cache	896 KB	960 KB+7%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
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 video memory. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2 MB (Quadro P5200 Max-Q) — the Quadro P5200 Max-Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	2 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12.1 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.1. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
DirectX	12	12.1
Vulkan	1.4+27%	1.1
OpenGL	4.6+2%	4.5
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 5.0 (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP7. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Quadro P5200 Max-Q).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 5.0
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP7
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro P5200 Max-Q's 100W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Quadro P5200 Max-Q). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 85°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro P5200 Max-Q
TDP	75W-25%	100W
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C-18%	85°C
Perf/Watt	104.9	123.1+17%