NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA Quadro K6000

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA Quadro K6000 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

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 86% higher core clock speed: 1485 MHz vs 797 MHz
• Around 85% higher boost clock speed: 1665 MHz vs 902 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 28 nm
• Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 6008 MHz
• Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 576 vs 543
• Around 72% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39405 vs 22920
• 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 134.955 vs 67.178
• Around 18% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 8.756 vs 7.435
• Around 3% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 91.78 vs 88.889
• Around 60% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 569.916 vs 355.166

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro K6000

• Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 8059 vs 7877
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1816.61 vs 1294.279
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 12657 vs 10959
• Around 15% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 12657 vs 10959

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro K6000

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	7877 8059
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	576 543
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	39405 22920
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	134.955 67.178
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1294.279 1816.61
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8.756 7.435
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	91.78 88.889
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	569.916 355.166
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10959 12657
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	10959 12657
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3711
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3356

Compare specifications (specs)