Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q vs GeForce GTX 465

Place in the ranking	567	261
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.19	no data
Power efficiency	2.38	24.86
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GF100	TU106
Market segment	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Release date	31 May 2010 (14 years ago)	27 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$279	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores	352	2304
Core clock speed	607 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1215 MHz
Number of transistors	3,100 million	10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	60 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	26.75	175.0
Floating-point processing power	0.8554 TFLOPS	5.599 TFLOPS
Compute performance	30x	no data
ROPs	32	64
TMUs	44	144
Tensor Cores	no data	288
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	36

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 size	no data	large
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0 x 16	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	241 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1603 MHz (3206 data rate)	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	102.6 GB/s	448.0 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 Connectors	Two Dual Link DVIMini HDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	-	+
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.5
OpenGL	4.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.2.131
CUDA	+	7.5

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 465 6.66

RTX 3000 Max-Q 20.87
+213%

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 465 2653

RTX 3000 Max-Q 8309
+213%

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 HD	21−24 −252%	74 +252%
1440p	14−16 −221%	45 +221%
4K	10−12 −230%	33 +230%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	13.29	no data
1440p	19.93	no data
4K	27.90	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	63 +0%	63 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	26 +0%	26 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	77 +0%	77 +0%
Valorant	119 +0%	119 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 +0%	22 +0%
Dota 2	99 +0%	99 +0%
Far Cry 5	80 +0%	80 +0%
Fortnite	110−120 +0%	110−120 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	85 +0%	85 +0%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Valorant	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
World of Tanks	240−250 +0%	240−250 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	56 +0%	56 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
Dota 2	120 +0%	120 +0%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Valorant	103 +0%	103 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Dota 2	49 +0%	49 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	49 +0%	49 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
World of Tanks	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45 +0%	45 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	68 +0%	68 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Dota 2	65 +0%	65 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	65 +0%	65 +0%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65 +0%	65 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5 +0%	5 +0%
Dota 2	76 +0%	76 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Fortnite	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Valorant	32 +0%	32 +0%

This is how GTX 465 and RTX 3000 Max-Q compete in popular games:

RTX 3000 Max-Q is 252% faster in 1080p
RTX 3000 Max-Q is 221% faster in 1440p
RTX 3000 Max-Q is 230% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.66	20.87
Recency	31 May 2010	27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	6 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	60 Watt

RTX 3000 Max-Q has a 213.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 233.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 465 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 465 is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 3000 Max-Q 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.