GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs Quadro 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000D Quadro 4000 Quadro 4100 Quadro 5000 Quadro 6000 Quadro 7000
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1050 Mobile GTX 1050 Ti Mobile GTX 1060 Mobile GTX 1650 Mobile GTX 1650 Max-Q GTX 1650 Mobile Refresh GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q GTX 1650 Ti Mobile GTX 1660 Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Mobile GTX 1660 Ti Max-Q GTX 1660 Ti Mobile Refresh

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 4000 with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 4000
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 142 Watt
3.83

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile outperforms 4000 by a whopping 428% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile GTX 1650 Ti Mobile

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking702269
Place by popularitynot in top-10069
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.16no data
Power efficiency1.8627.94
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGF100TU116
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date2 November 2010 (14 years ago)23 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores2561024
Core clock speed475 MHz1350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1485 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)142 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate15.2095.04
Floating-point processing power0.4864 TFLOPS3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs3264

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
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed702 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth89.86 GB/s192.0 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, 2x DisplayPortNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA2.07.5

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. 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.

Quadro 4000 3.83
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 20.21
+428%

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.

Quadro 4000 1477
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+428%

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 HD10−12
−480%
58
+480%
1440p7−8
−500%
42
+500%
4K5−6
−440%
27
+440%

Cost per frame, $

1080p119.90no data
1440p171.29no data
4K239.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 59
+0%
59
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 61
+0%
61
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 49
+0%
49
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 53
+0%
53
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 84
+0%
84
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hitman 3 51
+0%
51
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 181
+0%
181
+0%
Metro Exodus 91
+0%
91
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 44
+0%
44
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 201
+0%
201
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+0%
32
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 47
+0%
47
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 36
+0%
36
+0%
Far Cry 5 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hitman 3 50
+0%
50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 180
+0%
180
+0%
Metro Exodus 79
+0%
79
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 75
+0%
75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 183
+0%
183
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+0%
27
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 15
+0%
15
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 31
+0%
31
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 34
+0%
34
+0%
Far Cry 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Hitman 3 43
+0%
43
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 64
+0%
64
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 39
+0%
39
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 22
+0%
22
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 41
+0%
41
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 38
+0%
38
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Hitman 3 28
+0%
28
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120
+0%
120
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 20
+0%
20
+0%
Hitman 3 16
+0%
16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 42
+0%
42
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 25
+0%
25
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Quadro 4000 and GTX 1650 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 480% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 500% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 440% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 3.83 20.21
Recency 2 November 2010 23 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 142 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile has a 427.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 184% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 4000 is a workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is a notebook 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 Quadro 4000
Quadro 4000
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
Like
Like

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
FirePro W4100 FirePro W4100
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
vs
T1200 Mobile T1200 Mobile
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
ATI V5800 FirePro V5800
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
RX 5900 XT Radeon RX 5900 XT
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Pro 5500M Radeon Pro 5500M
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Radeon 620 Radeon 620
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
UHD Graphics 920 UHD Graphics 920
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
ATI M9+ M9+
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Graphics Radeon Graphics
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
Pro 5700 XT Radeon Pro 5700 XT
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
RX 6700 XT Radeon RX 6700 XT
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
T400 Mobile T400 Mobile
Quadro 4000 Quadro 4000
vs
RTX A5000 Mobile RTX A5000 Mobile

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 181 vote

Rate Quadro 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1620 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 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.