NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 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 SUPER

• Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
• Around 50% higher core clock speed: 1530 MHz vs 1020 MHz
• Around 39% higher boost clock speed: 1725 MHz vs 1245 MHz
• Around 98% higher texture fill rate: 138.0 GTexel/s vs 69.72 GTexel/s
• Around 43% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 896
• Around 64% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 10180 vs 6222
• 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 751 vs 326
• Around 54% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 55838 vs 36290
• Around 37% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 178.014 vs 129.465
• Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1961.932 vs 1047.553
• Around 42% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 11.169 vs 7.88
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 109.29 vs 78.563
• 2.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 787.025 vs 346.529
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 13569 vs 8824
• Around 54% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 13569 vs 8824

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

• 2.9x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 100 Watt
• 8.4x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2954 vs 352

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	10180 6222
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	751 326
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	55838 36290
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	178.014 129.465
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1961.932 1047.553
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	11.169 7.88
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	109.29 78.563
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	787.025 346.529
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13569 8824
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3707
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3352
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	13569 8824
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3707
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3357 3352
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	352 2954

Compare specifications (specs)