Quadro FX Go1400 vs GeForce GTX 1650

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. The Quadro FX Go1400 is positioned at rank #349 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. 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 Quadro FX Go1400

#334

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

14483%

#349

Quadro FX Go1400

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#350

GRID K520

MSRP: $3599|Avg: $50

96%

#351

GRID P40-12Q

MSRP: $5699|Avg: $5699

95%

#352

FirePro 2270

MSRP: $149|Avg: $30

93%

#353

FirePro 2460

MSRP: $180|Avg: $10

92%

#355

Quadro FX 580

MSRP: $199|Avg: $500

89%

#356

FirePro 3D V5700

MSRP: $599|Avg: $25

89%

#357

GRID M60-1B

MSRP: $2500|Avg: $120

88%

#359

FireStream 9270

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $20

87%

#360

Quadro 400

MSRP: $169|Avg: $500

86%

#361

FirePro 2260

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

86%

#362

Quadro FX 380 LP

MSRP: $169|Avg: $15

84%

#364

Quadro FX 1800

MSRP: $489|Avg: $100

79%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

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 2008). 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 FX Go1400 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 7614.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro FX Go1400.

Insight	Quadro FX Go1400	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-7614.7%)	✅Leading raw performance (+7614.7%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))	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	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1650 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.

Quadro FX Go1400 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Loading...

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro FX Go1400 and GeForce GTX 1650

Quadro FX Go1400

The Quadro FX Go1400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 602 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 102 points. Launch price was $1,799.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Quadro FX Go1400 scores 102 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 7614.7%. The Quadro FX Go1400 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 55 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 192 (Quadro FX Go1400) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.4623 TFLOPS (Quadro FX Go1400) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Quadro FX Go1400	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	102	7,869+7615%
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	Turing
Process Node	55 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	192	896+367%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.4623 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+545%
ROPs	24	32+33%
TMUs	64+14%	56
L2 Cache	0.19 MB	1 MB+426%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro FX Go1400	GeForce GTX 1650
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 GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.19 MB (Quadro FX Go1400) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro FX Go1400	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	0.19 MB	1 MB+426%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro FX Go1400 draws 150W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro FX Go1400) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None.

Feature	Quadro FX Go1400	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	150W	75W-50%
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	—	229mm
Height	—	111mm
Slots	—	2
Temp (Load)	—	70°C
Perf/Watt	0.7	104.9+14886%