GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile vs Quadro FX 4600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Quadro FX 4000 Quadro FX 4000 SDI Quadro FX 4400 Quadro FX 4400G Quadro FX 4500 Quadro FX 4500 SDI Quadro FX 4500 X2 Quadro FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600 SDI Quadro FX 4700 X2 Quadro FX 4800 Quadro FX 4800 Mac Edition
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 FX 4600 with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 4600
2007
768 MB GDDR3, 134 Watt
1.10

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile outperforms FX 4600 by a whopping 1737% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

FX 4600 FX 4600
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 ranking1081269
Place by popularitynot in top-10068
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency0.5728.20
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameG80TU116
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date5 March 2007 (17 years ago)23 April 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,999 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 cores961024
Core clock speed500 MHz1350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1485 MHz
Number of transistors681 million6,600 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)134 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate24.0095.04
Floating-point processing power0.2304 TFLOPS3.041 TFLOPS
ROPs2432
TMUs2464

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 1.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount768 MB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed700 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth67.2 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.140
CUDA+7.5

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.

FX 4600 1.10
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 20.21
+1737%

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.

FX 4600 425
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile 7796
+1734%

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 HD3−4
−1833%
58
+1833%
1440p2−3
−2000%
42
+2000%
4K1−2
−2600%
27
+2600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p666.33no data
1440p999.50no data
4K1999.00no 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 FX 4600 and GTX 1650 Ti Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 1833% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 2000% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is 2600% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.10 20.21
Recency 5 March 2007 23 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 768 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 134 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 1650 Ti Mobile has a 1737.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 433.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 650% more advanced lithography process, and 168% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 4600 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 4600 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 FX 4600
Quadro FX 4600
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.

FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
vs
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
GTX 1650 Ti Mobile GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Mobile
vs
Radeon 880M Radeon 880M
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
vs
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
FX 370 LP Quadro FX 370 LP
vs
Quadro P4200 Quadro P4200
FX 370 LP Quadro FX 370 LP
vs
Radeon 740M Radeon 740M
Tesla S1075 Tesla S1075
vs
R5 Mobile Graphics Radeon R5 Mobile Graphics
FX 3700 Quadro FX 3700
vs
HD Graphics 2500 HD Graphics 2500
Tesla S870 Tesla S870
vs
RTX 2060 SUPER Mobile GeForce RTX 2060 SUPER Mobile
NVS 285 Quadro NVS 285
vs
HD 6570 OEM Radeon HD 6570 OEM
FX 3500 Quadro FX 3500
vs
ATI 7200 64 MB Radeon 7200 64 MB
FX 3500 Quadro FX 3500
vs
ATI Rage Mobility-CL Rage Mobility-CL
FX 550 Quadro FX 550
vs
FX 5200 Ultra GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
FX 550 Quadro FX 550
vs
ATI IGP 350M Radeon IGP 350M

Community ratings

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

3.8 13 votes

Rate Quadro FX 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1638 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.