Quadro K2000 vs GeForce GTX 1650

Quadro K2000

2013Core: 954 MHz

GeForce GTX 1650

2019Core: 1485 MHzBoost: 1665 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Quadro K2000

1,582

0.0%

GeForce RTX 2060 (móvel)

RTX 2000E Ada Generation

TITAN V

GeForce GTX 1650

7,869

+397.4%

GeForce GTX 880M SLI

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448

GeForce GTX 960

GeForce GTX 1650 (móvel)

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

GeForce GTX 1080

GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER

GeForce RTX 3070 Ti

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. The Quadro K2000 is positioned at rank #261 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 K2000

#107

Quadro P6000

MSRP: $5999|Avg: $1500

98%

#108

Quadro M6000

MSRP: $4999|Avg: $500

89%

#245

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

5596%

#260

GRID P4-8Q

MSRP: $2000|Avg: $200

100%

#261

Quadro K2000

MSRP: $599|Avg: $500

100%

#263

FirePro 3D V5800

MSRP: $479|Avg: $30

97%

#264

GRID M3-3020

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $50

95%

#265

GRID P40-8Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

95%

#266

GRID M40

MSRP: $1000|Avg: $100

95%

#267

FirePro V3800

MSRP: $129|Avg: $12

94%

#268

FirePro V5800

MSRP: $479|Avg: $15

94%

#269

FirePro 3D V7800

MSRP: $759|Avg: $40

93%

#270

FirePro S9050

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1825

93%

#271

FirePro R5000

MSRP: $1099|Avg: $150

91%

#272

GRID M6-8Q

MSRP: $1500|Avg: $100

90%

#275

GRID K120Q

MSRP: $125|Avg: $20

89%

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 2013). 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 K2000 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 397.4% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro K2000.

Insight	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-397.4%)	✅Leading raw performance (+397.4%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
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 $500 for the Quadro K2000, it costs 85% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 3216.1% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+3216.1%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500)	✅More affordable ($75)

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 K2000 Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Quadro K2000 and GeForce GTX 1650

Quadro K2000

The Quadro K2000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 1 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 954 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 51W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,582 points. Launch price was $599.

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 K2000 scores 1,582 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 397.4%. The Quadro K2000 is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 384 (Quadro K2000) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 0.7327 TFLOPS (Quadro K2000) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
G3D Mark Score	1,582	7,869+397%
Architecture	Kepler	Turing
Process Node	28 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	384	896+133%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7327 TFLOPS	2.984 TFLOPS+307%
ROPs	16	32+100%
TMUs	32	56+75%
L1 Cache	32 KB	896 KB+2700%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Quadro K2000	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)

The Quadro K2000 comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Quadro K2000) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	0.25 MB	1 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K2000) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 3.

Feature	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12
Vulkan	1.2	1.4+17%
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+33%	3

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (Quadro K2000) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: NVDEC 1st gen vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264 (Quadro K2000) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).

Feature	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
Encoder	NVENC 1st gen	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)
Decoder	NVDEC 1st gen	NVDEC 4th gen
Codecs	H.264	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Quadro K2000 draws 51W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 38.1% difference. The Quadro K2000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K2000) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 202mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 70°C.

Feature	Quadro K2000	GeForce GTX 1650
TDP	51W-32%	75W
Recommended PSU	350W	300W-14%
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	None
Length	202mm	229mm
Height	111mm	111mm
Slots	1-50%	2
Temp (Load)	70°C	70°C
Perf/Watt	31.0	104.9+238%

💰

Value Analysis

The Quadro K2000 launched at $599 MSRP and currently averages $500, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 85% less ($425 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.2 (Quadro K2000) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 3178.1% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).