Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS vs GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1650 Max-Q
2019
4 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
16.12
+50.8%

GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS by an impressive 51% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking342436
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency36.9418.38
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)no data
GPU code nameTU117no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)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 cores10241536
Core clock speed930 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1125 MHz1500 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology12 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate72.00no data
Floating-point processing power2.304 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs64no data

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5LPDDR5x
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1751 MHz8448 MHz
Memory bandwidth112.1 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12_1
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.2.140-
CUDA7.5-

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.

GTX 1650 Max-Q 16.12
+50.8%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 10.69

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1650 Max-Q 11083
+57%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 7061

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.

GTX 1650 Max-Q 30957
+28.7%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 24058

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1650 Max-Q 7779
+11.4%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 6982

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

GTX 1650 Max-Q 3016
+51.6%
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 1989

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 HD60
+53.8%
39
−53.8%
1440p30
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
4K18
+80%
10−12
−80%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+56%
24−27
−56%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+17.4%
23
−17.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+56%
24−27
−56%
Battlefield 5 64
+45.5%
40−45
−45.5%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+22.7%
22
−22.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Far Cry 5 38
+22.6%
31
−22.6%
Fortnite 138
+130%
60−65
−130%
Forza Horizon 4 74
+72.1%
40−45
−72.1%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+57.7%
24−27
−57.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85
+136%
35−40
−136%
Valorant 120−130
+30.9%
90−95
−30.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+56%
24−27
−56%
Battlefield 5 54
+22.7%
40−45
−22.7%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+42.1%
19
−42.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 167
+11.3%
150−160
−11.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Dota 2 94
+56.7%
60−65
−56.7%
Far Cry 5 35
+16.7%
30
−16.7%
Fortnite 80
+33.3%
60−65
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 69
+60.5%
40−45
−60.5%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+57.7%
24−27
−57.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+55.6%
36
−55.6%
Metro Exodus 28
+40%
20−22
−40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 71
+97.2%
35−40
−97.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+29.3%
41
−29.3%
Valorant 120−130
+30.9%
90−95
−30.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 49
+11.4%
40−45
−11.4%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+58.8%
17
−58.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Dota 2 88
+60%
55−60
−60%
Far Cry 5 33
+22.2%
27
−22.2%
Forza Horizon 4 55
+27.9%
40−45
−27.9%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+57.7%
24−27
−57.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 53
+47.2%
35−40
−47.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30
+36.4%
22
−36.4%
Valorant 120−130
+30.9%
90−95
−30.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 59
−1.7%
60−65
+1.7%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+45.5%
75−80
−45.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+66.7%
14−16
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 16
+45.5%
10−12
−45.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+58.3%
70−75
−58.3%
Valorant 150−160
+38.7%
110−120
−38.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 36
+44%
24−27
−44%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+57.1%
21−24
−57.1%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+50%
18−20
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 36
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Valorant 80−85
+56.6%
50−55
−56.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 19
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
Dota 2 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
−54.3%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+52.9%
16−18
−52.9%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 11
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how GTX 1650 Max-Q and Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 54% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 67% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 80% faster in 4K

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 Max-Q is 136% faster.
  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Epic Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 2% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is ahead in 62 tests (97%)
  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (2%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 16.12 10.69
Chip lithography 12 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 40 Watt

GTX 1650 Max-Q has a 50.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.3% lower power consumption.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS, on the other hand, has a 200% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS in performance tests.

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 GTX 1650 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS

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.


3.9 670 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 14 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q or Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.