Quadro M2000 vs GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile with Quadro M2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 1650 Mobile
2020
4 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
18.47
+78.6%

GTX 1650 Mobile outperforms M2000 by an impressive 79% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking300441
Place by popularity68not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.63
Power efficiency25.329.45
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameTU117GM206
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date15 April 2020 (4 years ago)8 April 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$437.75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1024768
Core clock speed1380 MHz796 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz1163 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million2,940 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate99.8455.82
Floating-point processing power3.195 TFLOPS1.786 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6448

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data201 mm
Widthno data1" (2.5 cm)
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR6128 Bit
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz1653 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/sUp to 106 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort
Number of simultaneous displaysno data4

Supported technologies

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

3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Desktop Managementno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.56.4
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1401.1.126
CUDA7.55.2

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 Mobile 18.47
+78.6%
Quadro M2000 10.34

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 Mobile 7116
+78.6%
Quadro M2000 3985

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 HD58
+93.3%
30−35
−93.3%
1440p37
+106%
18−21
−106%
4K20
+100%
10−12
−100%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data14.59
1440pno data24.32
4Kno data43.78

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 52
+92.6%
27−30
−92.6%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+100%
21−24
−100%
Battlefield 5 81
+80%
45−50
−80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 51
+88.9%
27−30
−88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+95.2%
21−24
−95.2%
Far Cry 5 66
+88.6%
35−40
−88.6%
Far Cry New Dawn 79
+97.5%
40−45
−97.5%
Forza Horizon 4 166
+84.4%
90−95
−84.4%
Hitman 3 47
+95.8%
24−27
−95.8%
Horizon Zero Dawn 164
+82.2%
90−95
−82.2%
Metro Exodus 82
+82.2%
45−50
−82.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 71
+103%
35−40
−103%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 117
+80%
65−70
−80%
Watch Dogs: Legion 146
+82.5%
80−85
−82.5%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80
+100%
40−45
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24
+100%
12−14
−100%
Battlefield 5 70
+100%
35−40
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 47
+95.8%
24−27
−95.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 32
+100%
16−18
−100%
Far Cry 5 53
+96.3%
27−30
−96.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 54
+80%
30−33
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 148
+85%
80−85
−85%
Hitman 3 42
+100%
21−24
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 148
+85%
80−85
−85%
Metro Exodus 68
+94.3%
35−40
−94.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 64
+82.9%
35−40
−82.9%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+100%
21−24
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 141
+88%
75−80
−88%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 30
+87.5%
16−18
−87.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+87.5%
16−18
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 40
+90.5%
21−24
−90.5%
Forza Horizon 4 62
+107%
30−33
−107%
Hitman 3 37
+106%
18−20
−106%
Horizon Zero Dawn 57
+90%
30−33
−90%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55
+83.3%
30−33
−83.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+100%
18−20
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 17
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 52
+92.6%
27−30
−92.6%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 43
+79.2%
24−27
−79.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 34
+88.9%
18−20
−88.9%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 22
+83.3%
12−14
−83.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+100%
8−9
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 25
+108%
12−14
−108%
Forza Horizon 4 99
+80%
55−60
−80%
Hitman 3 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 44
+83.3%
24−27
−83.3%
Metro Exodus 39
+85.7%
21−24
−85.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+100%
18−20
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+110%
10−11
−110%
Watch Dogs: Legion 115
+91.7%
60−65
−91.7%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 33
+83.3%
18−20
−83.3%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21
+110%
10−11
−110%
Far Cry New Dawn 17
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Hitman 3 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45
+87.5%
24−27
−87.5%
Metro Exodus 26
+85.7%
14−16
−85.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+110%
10−11
−110%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 12
+100%
6−7
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+108%
12−14
−108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+100%
10−11
−100%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 17
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%

This is how GTX 1650 Mobile and Quadro M2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 93% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 106% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 Mobile is 100% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.47 10.34
Recency 15 April 2020 8 April 2016
Chip lithography 12 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 1650 Mobile has a 78.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M2000 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is a notebook card while Quadro M2000 is a 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 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
NVIDIA Quadro M2000
Quadro M2000

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 3307 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 210 votes

Rate Quadro M2000 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.