GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs Quadro P2000 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P2000 Mobile with GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

P2000 Mobile
2019
3.75 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
15.71

GTX 1650 Max-Q outperforms P2000 Mobile by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking344334
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.4537.07
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP106TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date15 February 2019 (5 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 cores11521024
Core clock speed1291 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speed1291 MHz1125 MHz
Number of transistors4,400 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate92.9572.00
Floating-point processing power2.974 TFLOPS2.304 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs7264

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 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3.75 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz1751 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.13 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

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.21.2.140
CUDA6.17.5

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.

P2000 Mobile 15.71
GTX 1650 Max-Q 16.12
+2.6%

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.

P2000 Mobile 8387
GTX 1650 Max-Q 11083
+32.1%

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.

P2000 Mobile 32964
+6.5%
GTX 1650 Max-Q 30957

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

P2000 Mobile 6847
GTX 1650 Max-Q 7779
+13.6%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

P2000 Mobile 43566
GTX 1650 Max-Q 45244
+3.9%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

P2000 Mobile 350317
GTX 1650 Max-Q 373879
+6.7%

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

P2000 Mobile 2046
GTX 1650 Max-Q 3016
+47.4%

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 HD55−60
−7.3%
59
+7.3%
1440p27−30
−7.4%
29
+7.4%
4K16−18
−12.5%
18
+12.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Elden Ring 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 52
+0%
52
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 54
+0%
54
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 69
+0%
69
+0%
Elden Ring 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 52
+0%
52
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 56
+0%
56
+0%
Metro Exodus 36
+0%
36
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 118
+0%
118
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 23
+0%
23
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 35
+0%
35
+0%
World of Tanks 167
+0%
167
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Elden Ring 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10
+0%
10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 43
+0%
43
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how P2000 Mobile and GTX 1650 Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 7% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 7% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Max-Q is 13% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.71 16.12
Recency 15 February 2019 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 3.75 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 30 Watt

GTX 1650 Max-Q has a 2.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, a 6.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Quadro P2000 Mobile and GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q.

Be aware that Quadro P2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 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 Quadro P2000 Mobile
Quadro P2000 Mobile
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.


4 111 votes

Rate Quadro P2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 642 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.