Quadro M2000M vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER with Quadro M2000M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650 SUPER
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 100 Watt
26.37
+194%

GTX 1650 SUPER outperforms M2000M by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking208486
Place by popularity60not in top-100
Power efficiency18.0911.17
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameTU116GM107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date22 November 2019 (5 years ago)3 December 2015 (9 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 cores1280640
Core clock speed1530 MHz1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1725 MHz1098 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate138.043.92
Floating-point processing power4.416 TFLOPS1.405 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8040

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 datalarge
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s80 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
VR Ready+no data
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+
Multi Monitor+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.131+
CUDA7.55.0

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.37
+194%
M2000M 8.96

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 10166
+194%
M2000M 3454

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 SUPER 18225
+254%
M2000M 5143

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 SUPER 64463
+213%
M2000M 20567

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 SUPER 12206
+194%
M2000M 4157

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.

GTX 1650 SUPER 68199
+129%
M2000M 29795

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GTX 1650 SUPER 55741
+469%
M2000M 9804

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

GTX 1650 SUPER 53337
+459%
M2000M 9534

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.

GTX 1650 SUPER 56481
+441%
M2000M 10438

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

GTX 1650 SUPER 113
+217%
M2000M 36

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

GTX 1650 SUPER 58
M2000M 70
+20.4%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

GTX 1650 SUPER 8
M2000M 33
+295%

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

GTX 1650 SUPER 55
+20.5%
M2000M 46

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

GTX 1650 SUPER 40
+1.3%
M2000M 40

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

GTX 1650 SUPER 30
+101%
M2000M 15

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 showcase-01

GTX 1650 SUPER 55
+150%
M2000M 22

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

GTX 1650 SUPER 5
+68.8%
M2000M 3

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
+94.4%
36
−94.4%
1440p35
+250%
10−12
−250%
4K21
+75%
12
−75%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 63
+350%
14−16
−350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+159%
21−24
−159%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 53
+308%
12−14
−308%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+219%
27−30
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 50
+257%
14−16
−257%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+186%
21−24
−186%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+172%
24−27
−172%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+152%
60−65
−152%
Hitman 3 62
+265%
16−18
−265%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+140%
50−55
−140%
Metro Exodus 69
+146%
27−30
−146%
Red Dead Redemption 2 84
+236%
24−27
−236%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95
+200%
30−33
−200%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+200%
60−65
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+159%
21−24
−159%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
+100%
12−14
−100%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+219%
27−30
−219%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 40
+186%
14−16
−186%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+186%
21−24
−186%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+172%
24−27
−172%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+152%
60−65
−152%
Hitman 3 59
+247%
16−18
−247%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+140%
50−55
−140%
Metro Exodus 82
+193%
27−30
−193%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+172%
24−27
−172%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 101
+237%
30−33
−237%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−28.6%
72
+28.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 180
+200%
60−65
−200%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+159%
21−24
−159%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
+15.4%
12−14
−15.4%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+200%
18−20
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+143%
14−16
−143%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+186%
21−24
−186%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+152%
60−65
−152%
Hitman 3 53
+212%
16−18
−212%
Horizon Zero Dawn 83
+66%
50−55
−66%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 83
+177%
30−33
−177%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50
+257%
14
−257%
Watch Dogs: Legion 21
−186%
60−65
+186%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 66
+164%
24−27
−164%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+194%
16−18
−194%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+186%
14−16
−186%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+200%
9−10
−200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+160%
5−6
−160%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+233%
9−10
−233%
Cyberpunk 2077 20
+400%
4−5
−400%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+200%
10−11
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+297%
35−40
−297%
Hitman 3 34
+183%
12−14
−183%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60
+216%
18−20
−216%
Metro Exodus 55
+358%
12−14
−358%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60
+500%
10−11
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+313%
8−9
−313%
Watch Dogs: Legion 164
+188%
55−60
−188%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 44
+193%
14−16
−193%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+225%
8−9
−225%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+250%
6−7
−250%
Hitman 3 34
+580%
5−6
−580%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+272%
35−40
−272%
Metro Exodus 32
+357%
7−8
−357%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+256%
9
−256%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5
+25%
4−5
−25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+227%
10−12
−227%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+500%
5−6
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
+167%
3−4
−167%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21
+133%
9−10
−133%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and M2000M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 94% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 250% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 75% faster in 4K

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

  • in Hitman 3, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 580% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the M2000M is 186% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is ahead in 70 tests (97%)
  • M2000M is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.37 8.96
Recency 22 November 2019 3 December 2015
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 55 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has a 194.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

M2000M, on the other hand, has 81.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while Quadro M2000M is a mobile workstation 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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIA Quadro M2000M
Quadro M2000M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 4752 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 500 votes

Rate Quadro M2000M 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.