GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Quadro P3200 Max-Q

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P3200 Max-Q with GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, including specs and performance data.

P3200 Max-Q
2018
6 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
20.31
+40.2%

P3200 Max-Q outperforms GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q by a considerable 40% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking250337
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.3922.89
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGP104TU117
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date21 February 2018 (7 years ago)2 April 2020 (4 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 cores17921024
Core clock speed1139 MHz1035 MHz
Boost clock speed1404 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate157.276.80
Floating-point processing power5.032 TFLOPS2.458 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs11264

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
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1753 MHz1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth168.3 GB/s160.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK 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
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.140
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.

P3200 Max-Q 20.31
+40.2%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 14.49

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.

P3200 Max-Q 9077
+40.2%
GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q 6475

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 HD75−80
+38.9%
54
−38.9%
1440p45−50
+36.4%
33
−36.4%
4K30−35
+25%
24
−25%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 56
+0%
56
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 112
+0%
112
+0%
Far Cry 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 67
+0%
67
+0%
Metro Exodus 31
+0%
31
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 54
+0%
54
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 106
+0%
106
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 32
+0%
32
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 26
+0%
26
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 25
+0%
25
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 52
+0%
52
+0%
Far Cry 5 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how P3200 Max-Q and GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q compete in popular games:

  • P3200 Max-Q is 39% faster in 1080p
  • P3200 Max-Q is 36% faster in 1440p
  • P3200 Max-Q is 25% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 20.31 14.49
Recency 21 February 2018 2 April 2020
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 16 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 50 Watt

P3200 Max-Q has a 40.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 33.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The Quadro P3200 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P3200 Max-Q is a mobile workstation card while GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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 Quadro P3200 Max-Q
Quadro P3200 Max-Q
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
GeForce GTX 1650 Ti 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.


4.7 21 vote

Rate Quadro P3200 Max-Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 216 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P3200 Max-Q or GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.