Quadro T1000 Max-Q vs GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 1650 Mobile
2019
4 GB GDDR5, GDDR6, 50 Watt
18.41
+5.9%

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Quadro T1000 Max-Q by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking282293
Place by popularity62not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation40.33no data
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2021)Turing (2018−2021)
GPU code nameN18P-G0, N18P-G61N19P-Q1
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date23 April 2019 (5 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Current price$301 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1024768
Core clock speed1380 MHz795 / 1230 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt35 - 40 Watt
Texture fill rate99.8475.60

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile and Quadro T1000 Max-Q compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5, GDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz8000 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.2.1401.2
CUDA7.57.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 Mobile 18.41
+5.9%
T1000 Max-Q 17.38

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Quadro T1000 Max-Q by 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 1650 Mobile 7116
+5.9%
T1000 Max-Q 6719

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Quadro T1000 Max-Q by 6% in Passmark.

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 HD58
+16%
50−55
−16%
1440p36
+20%
30−35
−20%
4K25
+19%
21−24
−19%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 52
+92.6%
27−30
−92.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55
+57.1%
35−40
−57.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+44.8%
27−30
−44.8%
Battlefield 5 81
+42.1%
55−60
−42.1%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 51
+34.2%
35−40
−34.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+51.9%
27−30
−51.9%
Far Cry 5 66
+43.5%
45−50
−43.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 79
+64.6%
45−50
−64.6%
Forza Horizon 4 82
+41.4%
55−60
−41.4%
Hitman 3 69
+68.3%
40−45
−68.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 104
+85.7%
55−60
−85.7%
Metro Exodus 82
+57.7%
50−55
−57.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 71
+47.9%
45−50
−47.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 79
+61.2%
45−50
−61.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 48
+50%
30−35
−50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 48
+37.1%
35−40
−37.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24
−20.8%
27−30
+20.8%
Battlefield 5 70
+22.8%
55−60
−22.8%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 52
+36.8%
35−40
−36.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
Far Cry 5 62
+34.8%
45−50
−34.8%
Far Cry New Dawn 53
+10.4%
45−50
−10.4%
Forza Horizon 4 80
+37.9%
55−60
−37.9%
Hitman 3 39
−5.1%
40−45
+5.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 81
+44.6%
55−60
−44.6%
Metro Exodus 55
+5.8%
50−55
−5.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 61
+27.1%
45−50
−27.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 54
+10.2%
45−50
−10.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 62
+67.6%
35−40
−67.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 42
+31.3%
30−35
−31.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8
−263%
27−30
+263%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
−11.8%
35−40
+11.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+11.1%
27−30
−11.1%
Far Cry 5 40
−15%
45−50
+15%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+6.9%
55−60
−6.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 57
+1.8%
55−60
−1.8%
Metro Exodus 51
−2%
50−55
+2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
−2.8%
35−40
+2.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 17
−88.2%
30−35
+88.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 52
+8.3%
45−50
−8.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 43
+26.5%
30−35
−26.5%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
+45.5%
30−35
−45.5%
Hitman 3 23
−8.7%
24−27
+8.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+22.2%
18−20
−22.2%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 26
+18.2%
21−24
−18.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+50%
10−11
−50%
Far Cry 5 35
+20.7%
27−30
−20.7%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 44
+25.7%
35−40
−25.7%
Metro Exodus 39
+21.9%
30−35
−21.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+8.8%
30−35
−8.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 76
+111%
35−40
−111%
Far Cry New Dawn 26
+44.4%
18−20
−44.4%
Hitman 3 14
+7.7%
12−14
−7.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+5.3%
18−20
−5.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 15
+36.4%
10−12
−36.4%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+23.5%
16−18
−23.5%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
+20%
10−11
−20%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Battlefield 5 25
+31.6%
18−20
−31.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%
Horizon Zero Dawn 23
+21.1%
18−20
−21.1%
Metro Exodus 19
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%

This is how GTX 1650 Mobile and T1000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 16% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 20% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 19% faster in 4K

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 1650 Mobile is 111% faster.
  • in Assassin's Creed Valhalla, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the T1000 Max-Q is 263% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Mobile is ahead in 60 tests (83%)
  • T1000 Max-Q is ahead in 10 tests (14%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.41 17.38
Recency 23 April 2019 27 May 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 35 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile and Quadro T1000 Max-Q.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is a notebook graphics card while Quadro T1000 Max-Q 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 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro T1000 Max-Q
Quadro T1000 Max-Q

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 3006 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 17 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 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.