CPU
GPU
Quadro P4000 (móvel)
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
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 P4000 (móvel) is positioned at rank #149 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower 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 P4000 (móvel)
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Quadro P4000 (móvel).
| Insight | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti holds the technical lead. Priced at $77 (vs $290), it costs 73% less, resulting in a 277.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+277.9%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($290) | ✅More affordable ($77) |
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 P4000 (móvel) and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
Quadro P4000 (móvel)
The Quadro P4000 (móvel) is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 11 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1227 MHz to 1228 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 16 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,500 points. Launch price was $819.61.
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 9 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 928 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,525 points. Launch price was $149.
Graphics Performance
The Quadro P4000 (móvel) scores 7,500 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti reaches 7,525 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Quadro P4000 (móvel) is built on Pascal while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti uses Kepler, both on 16 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,792 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Raw compute: 4.398 TFLOPS (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 1.425 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti).
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 7,500 | 7,525 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler |
| Process Node | 16 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1792+133% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.398 TFLOPS+209% | 1.425 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+300% | 16 |
| TMUs | 112+75% | 64 |
| L1 Cache | 672 KB+950% | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 0.25 MB (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — the Quadro P4000 (móvel) has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (12_1) (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (6th Gen) (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs NVENC 6 (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Decoder: NVDEC (3rd Gen) vs NVDEC 4. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265,VP9 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti).
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (6th Gen) | NVENC 6 (Volta) |
| Decoder | NVDEC (3rd Gen) | NVDEC 4 |
| Codecs | H.264,H.265,VP9 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Quadro P4000 (móvel) draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti's 50W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 0W (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 75.
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 50W-50% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 0W-100% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 75.0 | 150.5+101% |
Value Analysis
The Quadro P4000 (móvel) launched at $819 MSRP and currently averages $290, while the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti launched at $150 and now averages $77. The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti costs 73.4% less ($213 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 25.9 (Quadro P4000 (móvel)) vs 97.7 (GeForce GTX 1650 Ti) — the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti offers 277.2% better value. The Quadro P4000 (móvel) is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2012).
| Feature | Quadro P4000 (móvel) | GeForce GTX 1650 Ti |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $819 | $150-82% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $290 | $77-73% |
| Performance per Dollar | 25.9 | 97.7+277% |
| Codename | GP104 | GK106 |
| Release | January 11 2017 | October 9 2012 |
| Ranking | #326 | #633 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Quadro P4000 (móvel) and GeForce GTX 1650 Ti
