NVIDIA GeForce MX230 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q has 229% better performance than the GeForce MX230 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce MX230 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Summary
About the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce MX230 is an end-of-life mobile graphics card that released in Q1 2019. It is built on the Pascal GPU microarchitecture (codename GP108) and is manufactured on a 14 nm process.
Memory
The MX230 has 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,502 MHz memory clock and a 64 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 48.06 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The MX230 includes 256 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,519 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,531 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 16 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 16 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 10 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The MX230 has the 287th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 3.21% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
About the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q GPU
The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is a mobile graphics card that launched in Q2 2019. It is built on the Turing GPU microarchitecture (codename TU117) and is manufactured on a 12 nm process.
Memory
The GTX 1650 Max-Q has 4 GB of GDDR5 memory, with a 1,751 MHz memory clock and a 128 bit interface. This gives it a memory bandwidth of 112.1 Gb/s, which affects how fast it can transfer data to and from memory. GPU memory stores temporary data that helps the GPU with complex math and graphics operations. More memory is generally better, as not having enough can cause performance bottlenecks.
Cores and Clock Speeds
The GTX 1650 Max-Q includes 1,024 CUDA cores, the processing units for handling parallel computing tasks. The GPU operates at a core clock speed of 1,020 MHz and can dynamically boost its clock speed up to 1,245 MHz. Complementing the processing units are 64 texture mapping units (TMUs) for efficient texture filtering and 32 render output units (ROPs) for pixel processing.
Compatibility & Power Consumption
The GPU has a thermal design power (TDP) of 50 W. A power supply not strong enough to handle this might result in system crashes and potentially damage your hardware.
Benchmark Performance
The GTX 1650 Max-Q has the 169th best 3DMark 11 Performance GPU score among the 543 benchmarked GPUs in our database. It achieves 10.58% of the performance of the best benchmarked GPU, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4090.
General Info
General overview of the GPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.
| Info | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Manufacturer | NVIDIA | NVIDIA |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Market Segment | Mobile | Mobile |
| Release Date | Q1 2019 | Q2 2019 |
| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |
| Shop | Check Price | Check Price |
Gaming Performance
Select a game to compare FPS metrics
FPS Benchmarks
This table showcases the average frame rate (FPS) achieved both GPUs in at various resolutions. Frame rate is a crucial indicator of how smoothly the GPU can run the game. A higher FPS generally translates to a smoother gameplay experience.
- Frames Per Second
Borderlands 3 | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Low - 720p | 40 FPS | 95 FPS(+139.9%) |
| Medium - 1080p | 16 FPS | 52 FPS(+225%) |
| High - 1080p | 10 FPS | 34 FPS(+236.63%) |
| Ultra - 1080p | 7 FPS | 26 FPS(+251.35%) |
| QHD - 1440p | -- | -- |
| 4K UHD - 2160p | -- | -- |
Compare Frames Per Second (FPS)
The average frame rate (FPS) in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, higher FPS results in a smoother gameplay experience.
| GPU | Frames Per Second | |
|---|---|---|
| Quadro T2000 Max-Q | 27.3 | +269% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 Ti Max-Q | 26.1 | +253% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | 26 | +251% |
| Arc A370M | 22 | +197% |
| GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Mobile | 20.1 | +172% |
| GeForce MX330 | 8.8 | +19% |
| GeForce MX150 | 8.4 | +14% |
| GeForce MX230 | 7.4 | |
| Radeon 610M | 6.48 | -12% |
Compare Cost Per Frame
The average cost per frame in can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. Generally, a lower cost per frame implies better value for your money.
| GPU | Cost Per Frame | |
|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the FPS per dollar with other GPUs. | ||
Benchmark Performance
The GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q has 229% better performance than the GeForce MX230 for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
The GeForce MX230 is ranked 287th with a score of 3,363.5, and the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q is ranked 169th with a score of 11,082.5.
We do not have any performance per dollar data for the GeForce MX230 and the GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q for the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark.
Relative Performance
The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
| GPU | Benchmark Performance | |
|---|---|---|
| Quadro T1000 Mobile | 11,377 | +238% |
| Radeon HD 7970M X2 | 11,119 | +231% |
| GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q | 11,082.5 | +229% |
| RTX A500 Mobile | 10,818 | +222% |
| Arc A350M | 10,730 | +219% |
| Quadro K4000M | 3,466 | +3% |
| GeForce GTX 760M | 3,369 | +0% |
| GeForce MX230 | 3,363.5 | |
| Radeon R9 M375 | 3,314 | -1% |
| GeForce 945M | 3,309.5 | -2% |
Relative Value For Money
The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar GPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.
| GPU | Performance Per Dollar | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Our database does not have enough data to compare the benchmark performance per dollar with other GPUs. | |||
Benchmark Scores
This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both GPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful GPUs tend to have higher scores.
- Popular
| Benchmark | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| 3DMark Time Spy Graphics | 748 | 3,016 (+303.21%) |
| 3DMark Time Spy Score | 839.5 | 3,070 (+265.69%) |
| 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics | 15,796.5 | 45,243.5 (+186.41%) |
| 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics | 2,467.5 | 7,779 (+215.26%) |
| 3DMark 11 Performance Score | 3,621.5 | 10,471 (+189.13%) |
| Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit | 83.4 | 108.1 (+29.62%) |
| PassMark G3D Mark | 1,831 | 6,178 (+237.41%) |
| PassMark G2D Mark | 219 | 328 (+49.77%) |
Technical Specs
Graphics Processor
General information about the graphics processing unit like their architecture, manufacturing process size, and transistor count. Newer GPU architectures generally bring efficiency improvements and may introduce technologies that enhance graphical capabilities.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Codename | GP108 | TU117 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Turing |
| Process Size | 14 nm | 12 nm |
| Transistors | 1,800 million | 4,700 million |
Memory Details
Memory specifications like their capacity, bandwidth, and clock speeds. GPU memory stores graphics data like frames, textures, and shadows which helps display rendered images. These specs are crucial for graphics-intense applications like gaming and 3D modeling.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 48.06 Gb/s | 112.1 Gb/s |
| Memory Clock | 1,502 MHz | 1,751 MHz |
| Memory Interface | 64 bit | 128 bit |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 1,024 KB |
Board Compatibility
Compatibility information like their slot size, bus interface, power consumption, and display support. These specs are useful for verifying compatibility with your motherboard, power supply, and monitor.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x4 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 10 W | 50 W |
| Outputs | Device Dependent | Device Dependent |
Cores & Clock Speeds
Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can process graphics. Each type of core or component serves a specific computational purpose.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| CUDA Cores | 256 | 1,024 |
| Stream Multiprocessors (SM) | 2 | 16 |
| Texture Mapping Units (TMU) | 16 | 64 |
| Render Output Units (ROP) | 16 | 32 |
| Core Clock Speed | 1,519 MHz | 1,020 MHz |
| Core Clock Speed (Boost) | 1,531 MHz | 1,245 MHz |
Theoretical Performance
Theoretical performance numbers derived from the raw specifications of the different components like core count and clock speeds. While these provide a glimpse into peak processing power, they do not represent real-world performance.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| Pixel Fill Rate | 24.5 GPixel/s | 39.84 GPixel/s |
| Texture Fill Rate | 24.5 GTexel/s | 79.68 GTexel/s |
| FP32 Performance | 783.9 GFLOPS | 2.55 TFLOPS |
| FP64 Performance | 24.5 GFLOPS | 79.68 GFLOPS |
API Support
Graphics API versions supported by these graphics cards. APIs evolve over time, introducing new features and functionalities. Older GPUs may not support recent versions.
| Spec | GeForce MX230 | GeForce GTX 1650 Max-Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | 6.8 |
Check out these comparisons for similar GPUs:
Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar GPUs:
* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance GPU benchmark and MSRP.