GeForce 9650M GT vs Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile

Place in the ranking	159	1294
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	21.33	1.07
Architecture	Turing (2018−2022)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	TU104	G96C
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Laptop
Release date	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)	19 August 2008 (16 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 cores	2560	32
Core clock speed	1110 MHz	550 MHz
Boost clock speed	1560 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	13,600 million	314 million
Manufacturing process technology	12 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	249.6	8.800
Floating-point processing power	7.987 TFLOPS	0.0848 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	8
TMUs	160	16
Tensor Cores	320	no data
Ray Tracing Cores	40	no data

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 size	large	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-II

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 type	GDDR6	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1750 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	448.0 GB/s	25.6 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	1920x1200
G-SYNC support	+	-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 Ultimate (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.5	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/A
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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 33.22
+9391%

9650M GT 0.35

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.

RTX 4000 Mobile 56250
+4207%

9650M GT 1306

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 HD	109 +10800%	1−2 −10800%
1440p	61	0−1
4K	49	0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +656%	9−10 −656%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +2300%	3−4 −2300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	94	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +656%	9−10 −656%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +2300%	3−4 −2300%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +2567%	6−7 −2567%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90	0−1
Metro Exodus	103 +10200%	1−2 −10200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +1625%	4−5 −1625%
Valorant	130−140 +13500%	1−2 −13500%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	95−100 +9500%	1−2 −9500%
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +656%	9−10 −656%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +2300%	3−4 −2300%
Dota 2	44	0−1
Far Cry 5	89 +1013%	8−9 −1013%
Fortnite	150−160 +15500%	1−2 −15500%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +2567%	6−7 −2567%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	110−120 +10900%	1−2 −10900%
Metro Exodus	51	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +2586%	7−8 −2586%
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70 +1625%	4−5 −1625%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	110−120 +2240%	5−6 −2240%
Valorant	130−140 +13500%	1−2 −13500%
World of Tanks	270−280 +2038%	12−14 −2038%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	81	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	65−70 +656%	9−10 −656%
Cyberpunk 2077	70−75 +2300%	3−4 −2300%
Dota 2	127 +12600%	1−2 −12600%
Far Cry 5	90−95 +1038%	8−9 −1038%
Forza Horizon 4	160−170 +2567%	6−7 −2567%
Forza Horizon 5	85−90	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	180−190 +2586%	7−8 −2586%
Valorant	130−140 +13500%	1−2 −13500%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	60−65	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +8650%	2−3 −8650%
Red Dead Redemption 2	30−35	0−1
World of Tanks	210−220 +10800%	2−3 −10800%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	73	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%
Far Cry 5	100−110 +2600%	4−5 −2600%
Forza Horizon 4	95−100 +9500%	1−2 −9500%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60	0−1
Metro Exodus	77	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60 +1300%	4−5 −1300%
Valorant	100−110 +1920%	5−6 −1920%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Dota 2	60−65 +327%	14−16 −327%
Grand Theft Auto V	60−65 +327%	14−16 −327%
Metro Exodus	27−30	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +10700%	1−2 −10700%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	60−65 +327%	14−16 −327%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	39	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +600%	2−3 −600%
Dota 2	106 +607%	14−16 −607%
Far Cry 5	45−50	0−1
Fortnite	45−50	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	55−60	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	30−35	0−1
Valorant	50−55	0−1

This is how RTX 4000 Mobile and 9650M GT compete in popular games:

RTX 4000 Mobile is 10800% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 4000 Mobile is 10700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, RTX 4000 Mobile surpassed 9650M GT in all 30 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	33.22	0.35
Recency	27 May 2019	19 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	12 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	110 Watt	23 Watt

RTX 4000 Mobile has a 9391.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 358.3% more advanced lithography process.

9650M GT, on the other hand, has 378.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9650M GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro RTX 4000 Mobile is a mobile workstation card while GeForce 9650M GT 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.