G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌25% higher power demand at 75W vs 60W.

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

2019

Why buy it

✅39.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Draws 60W instead of 75W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

2019

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 0 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Why buy it

✅39.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Access to DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020).
✅50% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (6 GB vs 4 GB).
✅Draws 60W instead of 75W, a 15W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 4 GB vs 6 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌No DLSS support; it relies on Upscaling support instead.
❌Limited future-proofing: older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in upcoming AAA games.
❌25% higher power demand at 75W vs 60W.

Trade-offs

❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 52.8 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design better than GeForce GTX 1650?

Yes. Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is the better GPU overall here. You are getting 39.3% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data, 3.2% higher PassMark G3D performance, DLSS 2 Super Resolution, and 6 GB vs 4 GB of VRAM.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more VRAM at 6 GB instead of 4 GB and better upscaling support with DLSS 2 Super Resolution (2020) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and you are getting 39.3% more estimated average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and 3.2% higher G3D Mark. GeForce GTX 1650 still holds the G3D-per-dollar lead, so the performance win comes with a real value premium. If you are comfortable paying the premium for the stronger gaming result, Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is the one to buy. If staying closer to budget matters more, GeForce GTX 1650 still makes more sense on price alone, but the performance trade-off is much harder to justify by current standards.

Is GeForce GTX 1650 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?

Yes. GeForce GTX 1650 is still a strong gaming GPU in 2026: it is still comfortable for 1080p and decent for 1440p, though 4K is more situational. This mostly comes down to price. If you want to stay closer to $149 MSRP, it remains a strong choice; if you are comfortable paying more, Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design earns that extra money with a clearly stronger gaming result and a more complete overall package.

Games Benchmarks

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
1080p
low	94 FPS	83 FPS
medium	83 FPS	72 FPS
high	70 FPS	59 FPS
ultra	58 FPS	39 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	73 FPS
medium	74 FPS	64 FPS
high	60 FPS	47 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	30 FPS
4K
low	41 FPS	27 FPS
medium	39 FPS	26 FPS
high	27 FPS	17 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	15 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
1080p
low	136 FPS	170 FPS
medium	113 FPS	135 FPS
high	94 FPS	110 FPS
ultra	71 FPS	94 FPS
1440p
low	79 FPS	131 FPS
medium	62 FPS	102 FPS
high	44 FPS	84 FPS
ultra	35 FPS	68 FPS
4K
low	36 FPS	76 FPS
medium	27 FPS	62 FPS
high	21 FPS	50 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	37 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
1080p
low	323 FPS	365 FPS
medium	283 FPS	292 FPS
high	205 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	169 FPS	183 FPS
1440p
low	225 FPS	274 FPS
medium	202 FPS	219 FPS
high	151 FPS	183 FPS
ultra	117 FPS	137 FPS
4K
low	130 FPS	183 FPS
medium	117 FPS	146 FPS
high	79 FPS	122 FPS
ultra	50 FPS	91 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
1080p
low	261 FPS	231 FPS
medium	211 FPS	195 FPS
high	191 FPS	159 FPS
ultra	166 FPS	134 FPS
1440p
low	201 FPS	180 FPS
medium	158 FPS	158 FPS
high	135 FPS	126 FPS
ultra	113 FPS	104 FPS
4K
low	99 FPS	107 FPS
medium	74 FPS	89 FPS
high	65 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	51 FPS	54 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 1650 Open Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design

The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 27 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 600 MHz to 1215 MHz. It has 2304 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 60W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 36 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 8,119 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 and the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design reaches 8,119 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design uses Turing, both on a 12 nm process. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,304 (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.599 TFLOPS (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1215 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
G3D Mark Score	7,869	8,119+3%
Architecture	Turing	Turing
Process Node	12 nm	12 nm
Shading Units	896	2304+157%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	5.599 TFLOPS+88%
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+37%	1215 MHz
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	144+157%
L1 Cache	0.88 MB	2.3 MB+161%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design supports the newer DLSS 2 Super Resolution, whereas the GeForce GTX 1650 is capped at Upscaling support.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	DLSS 2 Super Resolution
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	NVIDIA Reflex

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design has 6 GB. The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4 MB (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design) — the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	6 GB+50%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR6
Bus Width	128-bit	256-bit+100%
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB+300%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 12 Ultimate (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
DirectX	12	12 Ultimate
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	3	4+33%

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs NVENC 7th Gen (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs NVDEC 4th Gen. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs H.265,H.264 (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	NVENC 7th Gen
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	NVDEC 4th Gen
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	H.265,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design's 60W — a 22.2% difference. The Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 500W (Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 229mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs Unknown.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Quadro RTX 3000 with Max-Q Design
TDP	75W	60W-20%
Recommended PSU	300W-40%	500W
Power Connector	None	PCIe-powered
Length	229mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	70°C	Unknown-100%
Perf/Watt	104.9	135.3+29%