GeForce GTX 1650 vs G210M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce G210M with GeForce GTX 1650, including specs and performance data.

GeForce G210M
2009
Up to 1 GB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.33

GTX 1650 outperforms G210M by a whopping 6076% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1315279
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data37.82
Power efficiency1.6318.75
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT218TU117
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 June 2009 (15 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores16896
Core clock speed625 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors260 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate5.00093.24
Floating-point processing power0.048 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
Gigaflops72no data
ROPs432
TMUs856

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amountUp to 1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s128.0 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGA1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
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.

GeForce G210M 0.33
GTX 1650 20.38
+6076%

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.

GeForce G210M 128
GTX 1650 7880
+6056%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce G210M 1021
GTX 1650 44694
+4277%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce G210M 1805
GTX 1650 50549
+2700%

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 HD16
−331%
69
+331%
1440p0−141
4K-0−125

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.16
1440pno data3.63
4Kno data5.96

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2900%
90
+2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1186%
90
+1186%
Valorant 24−27
−1023%
292
+1023%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2450%
50−55
+2450%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14
−1550%
230−240
+1550%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Dota 2 10−11
−870%
97
+870%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2667%
83
+2667%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1129%
86
+1129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1675%
71
+1675%
Valorant 24−27
−900%
260
+900%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−414%
35−40
+414%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
Dota 2 10−11
−820%
92
+820%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2067%
65
+2067%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−843%
66
+843%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−925%
41
+925%
Valorant 24−27
−169%
70
+169%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−8500%
170−180
+8500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 18−20
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−4500%
46
+4500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3000%
31
+3000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 42

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 14−16
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−120%
33
+120%
Valorant 2−3
−4050%
83
+4050%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−1800%
19
+1800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−1200%
26
+1200%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−450%
11
+450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 61
+0%
61
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Fortnite 211
+0%
211
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Far Cry 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Fortnite 85
+0%
85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 81
+0%
81
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 41
+0%
41
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 61
+0%
61
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40
+0%
40
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
Valorant 177
+0%
177
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how GeForce G210M and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 331% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 is 8500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is ahead in 33 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.33 20.38
Recency 15 June 2009 23 April 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 75 Watt

GeForce G210M has 435.7% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 6075.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G210M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce G210M is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce G210M
GeForce G210M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


2.8 84 votes

Rate GeForce G210M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 24699 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce G210M or GeForce GTX 1650, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.