Quadro T2000 Mobile vs GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

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

GTX 1650 Mobile
2020
4 GB GDDR6, 50 Watt
18.51

T2000 Mobile outperforms GTX 1650 Mobile by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking302269
Place by popularity68not in top-100
Power efficiency25.4823.83
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTU117TU117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date15 April 2020 (4 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 cores10241024
Core clock speed1380 MHz1575 MHz
Boost clock speed1560 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors4,700 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt60 Watt
Texture fill rate99.84114.2
Floating-point processing power3.195 TFLOPS3.656 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6464

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 sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16

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 speed1500 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

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
Vulkan1.2.1401.2.131
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 Mobile 18.51
T2000 Mobile 20.77
+12.2%

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
T2000 Mobile 7985
+12.2%

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 Mobile 13132
T2000 Mobile 13524
+3%

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 HD59
−10.2%
65−70
+10.2%
1440p36
−11.1%
40−45
+11.1%
4K23
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 38
+2.7%
35−40
−2.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 52
+26.8%
40−45
−26.8%
Elden Ring 47
−40.4%
65−70
+40.4%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 66
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 33
−12.1%
35−40
+12.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 35
−17.1%
40−45
+17.1%
Forza Horizon 4 79
−11.4%
85−90
+11.4%
Metro Exodus 55
−1.8%
55−60
+1.8%
Red Dead Redemption 2 71
+51.1%
45−50
−51.1%
Valorant 83
−1.2%
80−85
+1.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 72
+9.1%
65−70
−9.1%
Counter-Strike 2 27
−37%
35−40
+37%
Cyberpunk 2077 28
−46.4%
40−45
+46.4%
Dota 2 72
−1.4%
70−75
+1.4%
Elden Ring 65
−1.5%
65−70
+1.5%
Far Cry 5 62
−9.7%
65−70
+9.7%
Fortnite 95−100
−10.1%
100−110
+10.1%
Forza Horizon 4 64
−37.5%
85−90
+37.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 59
−23.7%
70−75
+23.7%
Metro Exodus 40
−40%
55−60
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 165
+19.6%
130−140
−19.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27
−74.1%
45−50
+74.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
−13.8%
65−70
+13.8%
Valorant 47
−78.7%
80−85
+78.7%
World of Tanks 130
−81.5%
230−240
+81.5%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 56
−17.9%
65−70
+17.9%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
−12.1%
35−40
+12.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 25
−64%
40−45
+64%
Dota 2 89
+21.9%
70−75
−21.9%
Far Cry 5 73
+7.4%
65−70
−7.4%
Forza Horizon 4 55
−60%
85−90
+60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
−8.7%
130−140
+8.7%
Valorant 75−80
−12%
80−85
+12%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 27−30
−13.8%
30−35
+13.8%
Elden Ring 30−33
−16.7%
35−40
+16.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
−17.2%
30−35
+17.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 160−170
−3%
170−180
+3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
−11.8%
18−20
+11.8%
World of Tanks 120−130
−10.2%
140−150
+10.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 37
−13.5%
40−45
+13.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 15
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Far Cry 5 45−50
−18.8%
55−60
+18.8%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
−14.9%
50−55
+14.9%
Metro Exodus 39
−20.5%
45−50
+20.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
−16%
27−30
+16%
Valorant 45−50
−14.9%
50−55
+14.9%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Dota 2 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Elden Ring 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%
Metro Exodus 12
−25%
14−16
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 47
−31.9%
60−65
+31.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−8.3%
12−14
+8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
−12.9%
35−40
+12.9%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 17
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
−13.3%
16−18
+13.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 45
+28.6%
35−40
−28.6%
Far Cry 5 24−27
−12.5%
27−30
+12.5%
Fortnite 23
−8.7%
24−27
+8.7%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
−14.8%
30−35
+14.8%
Valorant 21−24
−13.6%
24−27
+13.6%

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

  • T2000 Mobile is 10% faster in 1080p
  • T2000 Mobile is 11% faster in 1440p
  • T2000 Mobile is 4% faster in 4K

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 Mobile is 51% faster.
  • in World of Tanks, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the T2000 Mobile is 82% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 Mobile is ahead in 8 tests (13%)
  • T2000 Mobile is ahead in 53 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 18.51 20.77
Recency 15 April 2020 27 May 2019
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 60 Watt

GTX 1650 Mobile has an age advantage of 10 months, and 20% lower power consumption.

T2000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 12.2% higher aggregate performance score.

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

Be aware that GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile is a notebook graphics 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 Mobile
GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile
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 3369 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 Mobile 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.