Quadro K5100M vs GeForce GTX 1650
Quadro K5100M
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650
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. The Quadro K5100M is positioned at rank #28 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Great cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Quadro K5100M
Performance Per Dollar
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 K5100M 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 141.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Quadro K5100M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-141.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+141.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Quadro K5100M and GeForce GTX 1650
Quadro K5100M
The Quadro K5100M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 23 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 771 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,264 points.
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 K5100M scores 3,264 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 141.1%. The Quadro K5100M is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (Quadro K5100M) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 2.369 TFLOPS (Quadro K5100M) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,264 | 7,869+141% |
| Architecture | Kepler | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+71% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 2.369 TFLOPS | 2.984 TFLOPS+26% |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+129% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 896 KB+600% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | 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 K5100M comes with 8 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB. The Quadro K5100M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (Quadro K5100M) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (Quadro K5100M) 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 K5100M | 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: 1st Gen NVENC (Kepler) (Quadro K5100M) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs NVDEC 4th gen. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (Quadro K5100M) vs H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650).
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | 1st Gen NVENC (Kepler) | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP5 | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro K5100M draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro K5100M) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 70°C.
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 75W-25% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | — | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 70°C-18% |
| Perf/Watt | 32.6 | 104.9+222% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2013).
| Feature | Quadro K5100M | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $149 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $75 |
| Codename | GK104 | TU117 |
| Release | July 23 2013 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #562 | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro K5100M and GeForce GTX 1650
