GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs FirePro W8100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
S9100 S9150 S9170 W8100 W9100
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
1650 Mobile 1650 Max-Q 1650 Mobile Refresh 1650 Ti Max-Q 1650 Ti Mobile 1660 Mobile 1660 Ti Mobile 1660 Ti Max-Q T400 Mobile T500 Max-Q T550 Mobile T600 Max-Q

Aggregate performance score

We've compared FirePro W8100 with GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

FirePro W8100
2014
8 GB GDDR5, 220 Watt
19.01
+18.7%

W8100 outperforms GTX 1650 Max-Q by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
GTX 1650 Max-Q GTX 1650 Max-Q

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking291335
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.3439.16
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameHawaiiTU117
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date23 June 2014 (10 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores25601024
Core clock speed824 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1125 MHz
Number of transistors6,200 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)220 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate131.872.00
Floating-point processing power4.219 TFLOPS2.304 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs16064

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Form factorfull height / full lengthno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width512 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz1751 MHz
Memory bandwidth320 GB/s112.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors4x DisplayPort, 1x SDINo outputs
StereoOutput3D+-
DisplayPort count4no data
Dual-link DVI support+-
HD сomponent video output+-

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

FirePro W8100 19.01
+18.7%
GTX 1650 Max-Q 16.01

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

FirePro W8100 7332
+18.7%
GTX 1650 Max-Q 6176

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD70−75
+16.7%
60
−16.7%
1440p35−40
+12.9%
31
−12.9%
4K18−21
+5.9%
17
−5.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 49
+0%
49
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 42
+0%
42
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 195
+0%
195
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+0%
69
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Battlefield 5 55
+0%
55
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 40
+0%
40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 41
+0%
41
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 179
+0%
179
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 58
+0%
58
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45
+0%
45
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20
+0%
20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 25
+0%
25
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+0%
55
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+0%
30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 42
+0%
42
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 26
+0%
26
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 17
+0%
17
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 124
+0%
124
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 13
+0%
13
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 22
+0%
22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8
+0%
8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 13
+0%
13
+0%

This is how FirePro W8100 and GTX 1650 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • FirePro W8100 is 17% faster in 1080p
  • FirePro W8100 is 13% faster in 1440p
  • FirePro W8100 is 6% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 19.01 16.01
Recency 23 June 2014 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 220 Watt 30 Watt

FirePro W8100 has a 18.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 633.3% lower power consumption.

The FirePro W8100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that FirePro W8100 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.

AMD FirePro W8100
FirePro W8100
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
Pro 5300 Radeon Pro 5300
GTX 1650 Max-Q GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
vs
HD 7970M Crossfire Radeon HD 7970M Crossfire
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
Tesla M60 Tesla M60
GTX 770M GeForce GTX 770M
vs
RX 7700 XT Radeon RX 7700 XT
GTX 860M GeForce GTX 860M
vs
HD 6370M Radeon HD 6370M
GeForce 610M GeForce 610M
vs
UHD Graphics G1 32EU Mobile UHD Graphics G1 32EU Mobile
FirePro W9100 FirePro W9100
vs
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
GTX 1080 11Gbps GeForce GTX 1080 11Gbps
FirePro W8100 FirePro W8100
vs
GTX 760 GeForce GTX 760
Pro WX 5100 Radeon Pro WX 5100
vs
UHD Graphics 750 (Alder Lake) UHD Graphics 750 (Alder Lake)
Pro WX 5100 Radeon Pro WX 5100
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.4 17 votes

Rate FirePro W8100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 600 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.