Tesla M6 vs GeForce GTX 1650
Tesla M6
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 Tesla M6 is positioned at rank #188 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 Tesla M6
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. 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 Tesla M6 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 26.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tesla M6.
| Insight | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-26.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+26.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $75 versus $84 for the Tesla M6, it costs 11% less. While it maintains competitive performance, this results in a 41.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+41.6%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($84) | ✅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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Tesla M6 and GeForce GTX 1650
Tesla M6
The Tesla M6 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 930 MHz to 1180 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6,225 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 Tesla M6 scores 6,225 versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 7,869 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 26.4%. The Tesla M6 is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1650 uses Turing, both on 28 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 1,536 (Tesla M6) vs 896 (GeForce GTX 1650). Raw compute: 3.625 TFLOPS (Tesla M6) vs 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650). Boost clocks: 1180 MHz vs 1665 MHz.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 6,225 | 7,869+26% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Turing |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 1536+71% | 896 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.625 TFLOPS+21% | 2.984 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1180 MHz | 1665 MHz+41% |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 96+71% | 56 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 896 KB+56% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Tesla M6 | 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 video memory. Bus width: 256-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Tesla M6) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) — the Tesla M6 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 256-bit+100% | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (Tesla M6) vs 12 (GeForce GTX 1650). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 3.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 3 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th Gen (Tesla M6) vs NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650). Decoder: NVDEC 2nd Gen vs NVDEC 4th gen.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 5th Gen | NVENC 5th gen (Volta) |
| Decoder | NVDEC 2nd Gen | NVDEC 4th gen |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 |
Power & Dimensions
The Tesla M6 draws 100W versus the GeForce GTX 1650's 75W — a 28.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Tesla M6) vs 300W (GeForce GTX 1650). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 1mm vs 229mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots.
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 100W | 75W-25% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 1mm | 229mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70°C |
| Perf/Watt | 62.3 | 104.9+68% |
Value Analysis
The Tesla M6 launched at $1000 MSRP and currently averages $84, while the GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 and now averages $75. The GeForce GTX 1650 costs 10.7% less ($9 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 74.1 (Tesla M6) vs 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 41.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | Tesla M6 | GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1000 | $149-85% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $84 | $75-11% |
| Performance per Dollar | 74.1 | 104.9+42% |
| Codename | GM204 | TU117 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | April 23 2019 |
| Ranking | #388 | #323 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Tesla M6 and GeForce GTX 1650
