Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 vs GeForce 8200M G
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1500 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | no data | PowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011) |
| GPU code name | MCP77MV MCP79MVL | Cedar Trail |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 June 2008 (18 years ago) | 1 November 2011 (14 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 8 | 4 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 640 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 32 nm |
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.
| Shared memory | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 3 June 2008 | 1 November 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 32 nm |
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce 8200M G and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
