RTX A5500 Mobile vs GeForce 9200
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9200 with RTX A5500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.
RTX A5500 Mobile outperforms 9200 by a whopping 10275% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1352 | 112 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.78 | 19.50 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | C78 | GA103 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 6 May 2008 (18 years ago) | 22 March 2022 (4 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 | 16 | 7424 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 975 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | 22,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 165 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 348.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0384 TFLOPS | 22.27 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 96 |
| TMUs | 8 | 232 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 232 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 58 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 7.3 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 4 MB |
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 |
| Interface | PCI | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Width | IGP | no data |
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 | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 512.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 1−2 | 125
+12400%
|
| 1440p | 0−1 | 75 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 50 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220−230 | 220−230 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 129 | 129 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 110−120 | 110−120 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220−230 | 220−230 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 114 | 114 |
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Fortnite | 180−190 | 180−190 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| Valorant | 240−250 | 240−250 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 220−230 | 220−230 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280 | 270−280 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 88 | 88 |
| Dota 2 | 164 | 164 |
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Fortnite | 180−190 | 180−190 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 145 | 145 |
| Metro Exodus | 99 | 99 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 205 | 205 |
| Valorant | 240−250 | 240−250 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 76 | 76 |
| Dota 2 | 155 | 155 |
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140 | 130−140 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170 | 160−170 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 102 | 102 |
| Valorant | 240−250 | 240−250 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 180−190 | 180−190 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110 | 100−110 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 290−300 | 290−300 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 99 | 99 |
| Metro Exodus | 59 | 59 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180 | 170−180 |
| Valorant | 280−290 | 280−290 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110 | 100−110 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 45 | 45 |
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110 | 100−110 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130 | 120−130 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 80−85 | 80−85 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 110−120 | 110−120 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 30−35 | 30−35 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 97 | 97 |
| Metro Exodus | 31 | 31 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 63 | 63 |
| Valorant | 250−260 | 250−260 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55 | 50−55 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18 | 18 |
| Dota 2 | 132 | 132 |
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60 | 55−60 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65 | 60−65 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60 | 55−60 |
This is how GeForce 9200 and RTX A5500 Mobile compete in popular games:
- RTX A5500 Mobile is 12400% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.40 | 41.50 |
| Recency | 6 May 2008 | 22 March 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 165 Watt |
GeForce 9200 has 76% lower power consumption.
RTX A5500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 10275% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 90% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX A5500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9200 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 9200 is a desktop graphics card while RTX A5500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
