NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 vs NVIDIA Quadro P3000
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 and NVIDIA Quadro P3000 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. 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 2 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 36% higher core clock speed: 1485 MHz vs 1088 MHz
- Around 37% higher boost clock speed: 1665 MHz vs 1215 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 16 nm
- Around 14% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 7008 MHz
- Around 24% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7881 vs 6366
- Around 40% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 564 vs 404
- Around 51% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39165 vs 25862
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10959 vs 9579
- Around 14% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10959 vs 9579
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 30 April 2019 vs 11 January 2017 |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz vs 1088 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz vs 1215 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 16 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 7008 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 vs 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 vs 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 vs 25862 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 vs 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 vs 9579 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro P3000
- 11.4x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3489 vs 305
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3720 vs 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3360 vs 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3720 vs 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3360 vs 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3489 vs 305 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro P3000
| 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 | NVIDIA Quadro P3000 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 | 6366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 | 404 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 | 25862 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 134.765 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1316.075 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 8.799 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 94.915 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 573.418 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3360 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 | 9579 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3720 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3360 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 | 3489 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | NVIDIA Quadro P3000 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Turing | Pascal |
| Code name | TU107 | N17E-Q1 |
| Launch date | 30 April 2019 | 11 January 2017 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | |
| Place in performance rating | 376 | 377 |
| Type | Desktop | Workstation |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz | 1215 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz | 1088 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 16 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | |
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Display Port | 1.4 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | |
Memory |
||
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz | 7008 MHz |
| Maximum RAM amount | 6 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 168 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 192 Bit | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Stereo | ||
| 3D Vision Pro | ||
| Mosaic | ||
| nView | ||
| nView Display Management | ||
| Optimus | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
ATIRadeon HD 4810
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 980
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla M6
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro P3000
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIAQuadro T1000 Max-Q
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1650 vs
NVIDIATesla K80
