Qualcomm Adreno 685 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile

Place in performance ranking	282	773
Place by popularity	62	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	40.31	0.66
Architecture	Turing (2018−2021)	no data
GPU code name	N18P-G0, N18P-G61	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	23 April 2019 (5 years ago)	6 December 2018 (5 years ago)
Current price	$301	$1429

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1650 Mobile has 6008% better value for money than Qualcomm Adreno 685.

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 cores	1024	no data
Core clock speed	1380 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1560 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,700 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	7 Watt
Texture fill rate	99.84	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile and Qualcomm Adreno 685 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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	no 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 type	GDDR5, GDDR6	no data
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	192.0 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12
Shader Model	6.5	no data
OpenGL	4.6	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
Vulkan	1.2.140	no data
CUDA	7.5	no data

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 18.42
+585%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 2.69

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by 585% 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
+698%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 892

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by 698% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 1650 Mobile 13132
+581%

Qualcomm Adreno 685 1927

GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 685 by 581% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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 HD	57 +613%	8−9 −613%
1440p	37 +640%	5−6 −640%
4K	23 +667%	3−4 −667%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	55	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	42 +600%	6−7 −600%
Battlefield 5	81	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	51	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	41	no data
Far Cry 5	66	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	79	no data
Forza Horizon 4	82	no data
Hitman 3	47	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	104	no data
Metro Exodus	82 +720%	10−11 −720%
Red Dead Redemption 2	71	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	79	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	48	no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	48	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24 +700%	3−4 −700%
Battlefield 5	70	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	47	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	32	no data
Far Cry 5	53	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	54	no data
Forza Horizon 4	148	no data
Hitman 3	39	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	148	no data
Metro Exodus	61 +663%	8−9 −663%
Red Dead Redemption 2	61	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	64	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	62	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	141	no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	8 +700%	1−2 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	34	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	30	no data
Far Cry 5	40	no data
Forza Horizon 4	62	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	57	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	55	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	36	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	17	no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	43	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	48	no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	22	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	26	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	15	no data
Far Cry 5	35	no data
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	no data
Hitman 3	26	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	44	no data
Metro Exodus	39 +680%	5−6 −680%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	35−40 +640%	5−6 −640%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	12	no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	21	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	17	no data
Hitman 3	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21 +600%	3−4 −600%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	12	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	9−10	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	5	0−1
Far Cry 5	12	no data
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +733%	3−4 −733%
Horizon Zero Dawn	23	no data
Metro Exodus	19	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	7−8	no data