GeForce 410M vs GTX 1650 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile and GeForce 410M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1650 Mobile
2020
4 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
18.08
+2599%

GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms 410M by a whopping 2599% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking3091187
Place by popularity51not in top-100
Power efficiency25.393.92
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTU117GF119
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 April 2020 (4 years ago)5 January 2011 (14 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 cores102448
Core clock speed1380 MHz575 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,700 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate99.844.600
Floating-point processing power3.195 TFLOPS0.1104 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPs324
TMUs648

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
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeGDDR6DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHzUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.55.1
OpenGL4.6+
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.140N/A
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 Mobile 18.08
+2599%
GeForce 410M 0.67

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 Mobile 7116
+2595%
GeForce 410M 264

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 Mobile 13132
+3064%
GeForce 410M 415

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 Mobile 31311
+1529%
GeForce 410M 1923

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 HD59
+638%
8
−638%
1440p37
+3600%
1−2
−3600%
4K240−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 69
+3350%
2−3
−3350%
Counter-Strike 2 38
+443%
7−8
−443%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+2500%
2−3
−2500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 51
+2450%
2−3
−2450%
Battlefield 5 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Counter-Strike 2 33
+371%
7−8
−371%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Far Cry 5 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Fortnite 90−95
+3033%
3−4
−3033%
Forza Horizon 4 82
+1950%
4−5
−1950%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
Valorant 164
+466%
27−30
−466%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Battlefield 5 60
+2900%
2−3
−2900%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+286%
7−8
−286%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130
+584%
18−20
−584%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+1500%
2−3
−1500%
Dota 2 96
+700%
12−14
−700%
Far Cry 5 54
+2600%
2−3
−2600%
Fortnite 90−95
+3033%
3−4
−3033%
Forza Horizon 4 80
+1900%
4−5
−1900%
Forza Horizon 5 34
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Grand Theft Auto V 59
+2850%
2−3
−2850%
Metro Exodus 33 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 65−70
+713%
8−9
−713%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Valorant 148
+410%
27−30
−410%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+2850%
2−3
−2850%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+357%
7−8
−357%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Dota 2 89
+642%
12−14
−642%
Far Cry 5 53
+5200%
1−2
−5200%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+1450%
4−5
−1450%
Forza Horizon 5 39
+3800%
1−2
−3800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 71
+788%
8−9
−788%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+800%
4−5
−800%
Valorant 130−140
+362%
27−30
−362%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 72
+3500%
2−3
−3500%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+6250%
2−3
−6250%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+2800%
1−2
−2800%
Metro Exodus 20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+4050%
4−5
−4050%
Valorant 159
+3080%
5−6
−3080%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+4600%
1−2
−4600%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 15 0−1
Far Cry 5 35
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+2050%
2−3
−2050%
Forza Horizon 5 23 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 44
+4300%
1−2
−4300%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+107%
14−16
−107%
Metro Exodus 12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21 0−1
Valorant 90
+2150%
4−5
−2150%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 25 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5 0−1
Dota 2 45
+4400%
1−2
−4400%
Far Cry 5 18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 5 13 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+750%
2−3
−750%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1

This is how GTX 1650 Mobile and GeForce 410M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 638% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 3600% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 Mobile is 6250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 1650 Mobile surpassed GeForce 410M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.08 0.67
Recency 15 April 2020 5 January 2011
Chip lithography 12 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 12 Watt

GTX 1650 Mobile has a 2598.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 410M, on the other hand, has 316.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 410M 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 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650
NVIDIA GeForce 410M
GeForce 410M

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.


4 3425 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 274 votes

Rate GeForce 410M 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 Mobile or GeForce 410M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.