
P106-100 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

P106-100
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
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. The P106-100 is positioned at rank 43 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is on rank 160, so the P106-100 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar P106-100
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The P106-100 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The P106-100 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% 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 Ti with Max-Q Design.
| Insight | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (250mm) | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the P106-100 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of P106-100 and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design

P106-100
The P106-100 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 12 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1607 MHz to 1733 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,628 points.

GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 2 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1035 MHz to 1200 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,574 points.
Graphics Performance
The P106-100 scores 6,628 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design reaches 6,574 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The P106-100 is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on 16 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,920 (P106-100) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 6.655 TFLOPS (P106-100) vs 2.458 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1733 MHz vs 1200 MHz.
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,628 | 6,574 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1920+88% | 1024 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.655 TFLOPS+171% | 2.458 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1733 MHz+44% | 1200 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 120+88% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 0.7 MB | 1 MB+43% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR6. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (P106-100) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design) — the P106-100 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12_1 (P106-100) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 6th Gen (P106-100) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 3rd Gen vs NVDEC (4th Gen).
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 6th Gen | NVENC (Turing) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 3rd Gen | NVDEC (4th Gen) |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9,H.265 10-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The P106-100 draws 75W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design's 50W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (P106-100) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 50W-33% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 250mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 88.4 | 131.5+49% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2017).
| Feature | P106-100 | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti with Max-Q Design |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $224 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | — |
| Codename | GP104 | TU117 |
| Release | December 12 2017 | April 2 2020 |
| Ranking | #529 | #371 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















