GeForce GTX 1650 vs Quadro 410

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GRID K1 GRID K100 GRID K140Q GRID K160Q GRID K340 NVS 510 NVS 1000 Quadro 410 Quadro K420 Quadro K600 Quadro K2000 Quadro K2000D
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
GTX 1650 GTX 1650 GDDR6 GTX 1650 SUPER GTX 1650 TU106 GTX 1650 TU116

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro 410 with GeForce GTX 1650, including specs and performance data.

Quadro 410
2012
512 MB DDR3, 38 Watt
1.14

GTX 1650 outperforms 410 by a whopping 1698% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Quadro 410 Quadro 410
GTX 1650 GTX 1650

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1085281
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1437.79
Power efficiency2.0618.74
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGK107TU117
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 August 2012 (12 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

GTX 1650 has 26893% better value for money than Quadro 410.

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 cores192896
Core clock speed706 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)38 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate11.3093.24
Floating-point processing power0.2711 TFLOPS2.984 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs1656

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length176 mm229 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed891 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.26 GB/s128.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.2.131
CUDA3.07.5

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.

Quadro 410 1.14
GTX 1650 20.50
+1698%

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.

Quadro 410 439
GTX 1650 7878
+1695%

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Quadro 410 1446
GTX 1650 39112
+2605%

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 HD3−4
−2200%
69
+2200%
1440p2−3
−1950%
41
+1950%
4K1−2
−2400%
25
+2400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p49.67
−2200%
2.16
+2200%
1440p74.50
−1950%
3.63
+1950%
4K149.00
−2400%
5.96
+2400%
  • GTX 1650 has 2200% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 has 1950% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 has 2400% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Battlefield 5 61
+0%
61
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 69
+0%
69
+0%
Fortnite 211
+0%
211
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60
+0%
60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 90
+0%
90
+0%
Valorant 292
+0%
292
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Battlefield 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 97
+0%
97
+0%
Far Cry 5 63
+0%
63
+0%
Fortnite 85
+0%
85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 83
+0%
83
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 81
+0%
81
+0%
Metro Exodus 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 86
+0%
86
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 71
+0%
71
+0%
Valorant 260
+0%
260
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 51
+0%
51
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 92
+0%
92
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65
+0%
65
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 41
+0%
41
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 66
+0%
66
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+0%
41
+0%
Valorant 70
+0%
70
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 61
+0%
61
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 40
+0%
40
+0%
Metro Exodus 20
+0%
20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 177
+0%
177
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 39
+0%
39
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 46
+0%
46
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 31
+0%
31
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 42
+0%
42
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 33
+0%
33
+0%
Metro Exodus 12
+0%
12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 83
+0%
83
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+0%
26
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 11
+0%
11
+0%

This is how Quadro 410 and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 2200% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 1950% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1650 is 2400% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 1.14 20.50
Recency 7 August 2012 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 38 Watt 75 Watt

Quadro 410 has 97.4% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 1698.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro 410 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro 410 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.

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 Quadro 410
Quadro 410
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650
Like
Like

Other comparisons

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

Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
FX 4600 Quadro FX 4600
GTX 1650 GeForce GTX 1650
vs
GTX 780 GeForce GTX 780
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
FX 1800 Quadro FX 1800
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
ATI HD 3450 3450
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
GeForce 210 210
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
FX 380 LP 380 LP
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
NVS 295 295
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
UHD Graphics 605 Graphics 605
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
RTX 3050 4 GB 3050 4 GB
Quadro 410 Quadro 410
vs
RTX 4090 4090
K5000 Mac Edition NVIDIA K5000 Mac Edition
vs
Pro Duo Polaris Duo Polaris
NVS 310 NVS 310
vs
GT 520M 520M
NVS 310 NVS 310
vs
GeForce 310M 310M

Community ratings

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

2.6 14 votes

Rate Quadro 410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 24792 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro 410 or GeForce GTX 1650, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.