GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs NVS 3100M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 3100M with GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

NVS 3100M
2010
512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.52

GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms NVS 3100M by a whopping 2935% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1237342
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.6136.94
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGT218TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date7 January 2010 (15 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 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 cores161024
Core clock speed606 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1125 MHz
Number of transistors260 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate4.84872.00
Floating-point processing power0.04698 TFLOPS2.304 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864

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 datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz1751 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/s112.1 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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA1.27.5

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.

NVS 3100M 0.52
GTX 1650 Max-Q 15.78
+2935%

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.

NVS 3100M 204
GTX 1650 Max-Q 6210
+2944%

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.

NVS 3100M 1121
GTX 1650 Max-Q 30957
+2663%

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 HD1−2
−5900%
60
+5900%
1440p0−130
4K0−118

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1500%
30−35
+1500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1500%
30−35
+1500%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1750%
74
+1750%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−1114%
85
+1114%
Valorant 27−30
−339%
120−130
+339%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−1850%
35−40
+1850%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−944%
167
+944%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1500%
30−35
+1500%
Dota 2 10−12
−755%
94
+755%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1625%
69
+1625%
Metro Exodus 0−1 28
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−914%
71
+914%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1225%
53
+1225%
Valorant 27−30
−339%
120−130
+339%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1500%
30−35
+1500%
Dota 2 10−12
−700%
88
+700%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−1275%
55
+1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−657%
53
+657%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−650%
30
+650%
Valorant 27−30
−339%
120−130
+339%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
−11100%
110−120
+11100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−4867%
140−150
+4867%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14−16
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−3600%
35−40
+3600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2300%
24−27
+2300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
−3500%
36
+3500%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 12−14
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−86.7%
27−30
+86.7%
Valorant 3−4
−2667%
80−85
+2667%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−750%
17
+750%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−450%
11
+450%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 64
+0%
64
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 138
+0%
138
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 80
+0%
80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+0%
56
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 59
+0%
59
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 16
+0%
16
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 36
+0%
36
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18
+0%
18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how NVS 3100M and GTX 1650 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 5900% faster in 1080p

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 Max-Q is 11100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is ahead in 35 tests (55%)
  • there's a draw in 29 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.52 15.78
Recency 7 January 2010 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 30 Watt

NVS 3100M has 114.3% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650 Max-Q, on the other hand, has a 2934.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 3100M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 3100M is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is a mobile workstation one.

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 NVS 3100M
NVS 3100M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

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.


3.1 138 votes

Rate NVS 3100M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 670 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about NVS 3100M or GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.