Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER with Quadro T2000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650 SUPER
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 100 Watt
26.44
+27.3%

GTX 1650 SUPER outperforms T2000 Mobile by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking211269
Place by popularity57not in top-100
Power efficiency18.2023.83
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU116TU117
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date22 November 2019 (5 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores12801024
Core clock speed1530 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1725 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors6,600 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate138.0114.2
Floating-point processing power4.416 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs8064

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR6GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed12000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Ready+no data
Multi Monitor+no data

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.56.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA7.57.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1650 SUPER 26.44
+27.3%
T2000 Mobile 20.77

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 1650 SUPER 10166
+27.3%
T2000 Mobile 7985

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GTX 1650 SUPER 18225
+34.8%
T2000 Mobile 13524

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD70
+40%
50−55
−40%
1440p36
+33.3%
27−30
−33.3%
4K23
+27.8%
18−20
−27.8%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 61
+64.9%
35−40
−64.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 63
+53.7%
40−45
−53.7%
Elden Ring 76
+15.2%
65−70
−15.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+21.2%
65−70
−21.2%
Counter-Strike 2 48
+29.7%
35−40
−29.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 47
+14.6%
40−45
−14.6%
Forza Horizon 4 121
+37.5%
85−90
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 89
+58.9%
55−60
−58.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 84
+78.7%
45−50
−78.7%
Valorant 115
+36.9%
80−85
−36.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+21.2%
65−70
−21.2%
Counter-Strike 2 39
+5.4%
35−40
−5.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
−7.9%
40−45
+7.9%
Dota 2 138
+89%
70−75
−89%
Elden Ring 82
+24.2%
65−70
−24.2%
Far Cry 5 151
+122%
65−70
−122%
Fortnite 130−140
+19.3%
100−110
−19.3%
Forza Horizon 4 101
+14.8%
85−90
−14.8%
Grand Theft Auto V 103
+41.1%
70−75
−41.1%
Metro Exodus 61
+8.9%
55−60
−8.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+18.1%
130−140
−18.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30
−56.7%
45−50
+56.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+31.8%
65−70
−31.8%
Valorant 100−110
+26.2%
80−85
−26.2%
World of Tanks 260−270
+11.4%
230−240
−11.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+21.2%
65−70
−21.2%
Counter-Strike 2 35
−5.7%
35−40
+5.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
−28.1%
40−45
+28.1%
Dota 2 191
+162%
70−75
−162%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+16.2%
65−70
−16.2%
Forza Horizon 4 83
−6%
85−90
+6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
+18.1%
130−140
−18.1%
Valorant 100−110
+26.2%
80−85
−26.2%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 45
+36.4%
30−35
−36.4%
Elden Ring 31
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+32.4%
30−35
−32.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+1.7%
170−180
−1.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 11
−72.7%
18−20
+72.7%
World of Tanks 170−180
+24.3%
140−150
−24.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+26.2%
40−45
−26.2%
Counter-Strike 2 20
+17.6%
16−18
−17.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 19
+11.8%
16−18
−11.8%
Far Cry 5 75−80
+36.8%
55−60
−36.8%
Forza Horizon 4 60
+11.1%
50−55
−11.1%
Metro Exodus 55
+17%
45−50
−17%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+34.5%
27−30
−34.5%
Valorant 70−75
+33.3%
50−55
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10
−70%
16−18
+70%
Dota 2 45
+28.6%
35−40
−28.6%
Elden Ring 17
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+28.6%
35−40
−28.6%
Metro Exodus 16
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+30.6%
60−65
−30.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+30.8%
12−14
−30.8%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45
+28.6%
35−40
−28.6%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+41.2%
16−18
−41.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
−20%
6−7
+20%
Dota 2 80
+129%
35−40
−129%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Fortnite 30−35
+32%
24−27
−32%
Forza Horizon 4 30
−3.3%
30−35
+3.3%
Valorant 35−40
+40%
24−27
−40%

This is how GTX 1650 SUPER and T2000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 40% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 33% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 SUPER is 28% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 162% faster.
  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 73% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 SUPER is ahead in 53 tests (84%)
  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 10 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 26.44 20.77
Recency 22 November 2019 27 May 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 60 Watt

GTX 1650 SUPER has a 27.3% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 5 months.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro T2000 Mobile in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER is a desktop card while Quadro T2000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER
NVIDIA Quadro T2000 Mobile
Quadro T2000 Mobile

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 4827 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 398 votes

Rate Quadro T2000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.