NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q and NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), 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.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 17% higher pipelines: 896 vs 768
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- Around 86% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 35607 vs 19093
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8824 vs 7710
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8824 vs 7710
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 23 April 2019 vs 5 July 2017 |
| Pipelines | 896 vs 768 |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Benchmarks | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35607 vs 19093 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8824 vs 7710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8824 vs 7710 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q
- Around 19% higher core clock speed: 1215 MHz vs 1020 MHz
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1468 MHz vs 1245 MHz
- 3x more memory clock speed: 6008 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective)
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 6135 vs 3352
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 6135 vs 3352
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1215 MHz vs 1020 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1468 MHz vs 1245 MHz |
| Memory clock speed | 6008 MHz vs 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 6135 vs 3352 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3707 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 6135 vs 3352 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q
| 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) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6162 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 326 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 35607 | 19093 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 129.441 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1047.138 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 7.882 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 78.563 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 346.498 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8824 | 7710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3707 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 6135 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8824 | 7710 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3707 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 6135 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2950 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | NVIDIA Quadro P2000 Max-Q | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Code name | TU117 | GP107GL |
| Launch date | 23 April 2019 | 5 July 2017 |
| Place in performance rating | 458 | 452 |
| Type | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1245 MHz | 1468 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1020 MHz | 1215 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 69.72 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 4.462 TFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 2.231 TFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 896 | 768 |
| Pixel fill rate | 39.84 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 69.72 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 4700 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4096 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 128.0 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz (8000 MHz effective) | 6008 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
ATIFireGL V7200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
ATIFireGL V5200
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon R9 M395X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
AMDRadeon R9 M470X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
NVIDIAQuadro P5200 Max-Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q vs
IntelUHD Graphics P750
