NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs Intel HD Graphics 620
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q and Intel HD Graphics 620 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Video outputs and ports, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- 3.5x more core clock speed: 1035 MHz vs 300 MHz
- Around 14% higher boost clock speed: 1200 MHz vs 1050 MHz
- 42.7x more pipelines: 1024 vs 24
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- 7.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6514 vs 922
- Around 56% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 336 vs 216
- 9.4x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39228 vs 4178
- 7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 9780 vs 1404
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2168 vs 1733
- 7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 9780 vs 1404
- Around 25% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2168 vs 1733
- 9.2x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3172 vs 343
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 16 Mar 2020 vs 30 August 2016 |
| Core clock speed | 1035 MHz vs 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz vs 1050 MHz |
| Pipelines | 1024 vs 24 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6514 vs 922 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 336 vs 216 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39228 vs 4178 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9780 vs 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2168 vs 1733 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9780 vs 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2168 vs 1733 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3172 vs 343 |
Reasons to consider the Intel HD Graphics 620
- 8x more maximum memory size: 32 GB vs 4 GB
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3340 vs 1982
- Around 69% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3340 vs 1982
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB vs 4 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3340 vs 1982 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3340 vs 1982 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q
GPU 2: Intel HD Graphics 620
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6514 | 922 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 336 | 216 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39228 | 4178 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 9780 | 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2168 | 1733 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1982 | 3340 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 9780 | 1404 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2168 | 1733 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1982 | 3340 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3172 | 343 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 24.275 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 227.879 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.508 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 15.582 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 30.288 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | Intel HD Graphics 620 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Generation 9.5 |
| Code name | N18P-G62 | Kaby Lake GT2 |
| Launch date | 16 Mar 2020 | 30 August 2016 |
| Place in performance rating | 425 | 1334 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1050 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1035 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 24 |
| Floating-point performance | 403.2 gflops | |
| Texture fill rate | 25.2 GTexel / s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 189 million | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x1 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 12000 MHz | |
| Memory type | GDDR6 | DDR3L / LPDDR3 / LPDDR4 |
| Shared memory | 1 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Technologies |
||
| Quick Sync | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 550v
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX TITAN
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon R9 280
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon Pro V340 MxGPU
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon Pro W6800X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q vs
IntelArc A550M
