NVIDIA Quadro P520 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro P520 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 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 - G2D Mark, PassMark - G3D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
- Around 14% higher core clock speed: 1485 MHz vs 1303 MHz
- Around 12% higher boost clock speed: 1665 MHz vs 1493 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 12 nm vs 14 nm
- Around 33% higher memory clock speed: 8000 MHz vs 6000 MHz
- 2.4x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 564 vs 237
- 3.8x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 7881 vs 2091
- 4.9x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 39165 vs 7960
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 10959 vs 3527
- 3.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 10959 vs 3527
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3566
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3566
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 2295
- Around 46% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 2295
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1485 MHz vs 1303 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1665 MHz vs 1493 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm vs 14 nm |
| Memory clock speed | 8000 MHz vs 6000 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 564 vs 237 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 7881 vs 2091 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 39165 vs 7960 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10959 vs 3527 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10959 vs 3527 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3566 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 2295 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 2295 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro P520
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA Quadro P520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 237 | 564 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2091 | 7881 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 7960 | 39165 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3527 | 10959 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3527 | 10959 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3566 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3566 | 3715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 2295 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 2295 | 3358 |
| 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 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 305 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA Quadro P520 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Code name | GP108 | TU107 |
| Launch date | 27 May 2019 | 30 April 2019 |
| Place in performance rating | 758 | 376 |
| Type | Mobile workstation | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $179 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1493 MHz | 1665 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1303 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 23.89 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 11.94 GFLOPS | |
| Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 764.4 GFLOPS | |
| Pipelines | 384 | |
| Pixel fill rate | 23.89 GPixel/s | |
| Texture fill rate | 23.89 GTexel/s | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 1800 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Multi monitor support | ||
| DisplayPort count | 1 | |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| HDMI | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Height | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Laptop size | large | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.1 | 12.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.10 GB/s | |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 8000 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
| Multi Monitor | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA Quadro P520 with others
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
ATIRadeon X300 SE
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
NVIDIAQuadro K5100M
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
NVIDIAGRID K220Q
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
NVIDIAQuadro M1200 Mobile
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
NVIDIAGeForce MX330
NVIDIAQuadro P520 vs
NVIDIAT600
