Radeon RX 7900 XT vs GeForce FX Go 5200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX Go 5200 with Radeon RX 7900 XT, including specs and performance data.

FX Go 5200
2003
32 MB DDR
0.02
RX 7900 XT
2022, $899
20 GB GDDR6, 300 Watt
69.59
+347850%

7900 XT outperforms FX Go 5200 by a whopping 347850% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking158120
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data42.54
Power efficiencyno data18.08
Architectureno dataRDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameNV31MNavi 31
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 March 2003 (23 years ago)3 November 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$899

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

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 cores55376
Core clock speed1 MHz1387 MHz
Boost clock speed300 MHz2394 MHz
Number of transistorsno data57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data804.4
Floating-point processing powerno data51.48 TFLOPS
ROPsno data192
TMUsno data336
Ray Tracing Coresno data84
L0 Cacheno data2.6 MB
L1 Cacheno data3 MB
L2 Cacheno data6 MB
L3 Cacheno data80 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 sizemedium sizedno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data276 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 MB20 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit320 Bit
Memory clock speed300 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data800.0 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 Connectorsno data1x HDMI 2.1a, 2x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDDR12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.2
Vulkan-1.3

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.

FX Go 5200 0.02
RX 7900 XT 69.59
+347850%

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.

FX Go 5200 8
Samples: 29
RX 7900 XT 29115
+363838%
Samples: 7301

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-0−1199
1440p-0−1135
4K-0−185

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.52
1440pno data6.66
4Kno data10.58

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 0−1 328

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 0−1 262
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 280−290
+14000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 170−180
+2371%
Valorant 24−27 400−450
+1535%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 0−1 170
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10 270−280
+2989%
Dota 2 7−8 199
+2743%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 280−290
+14000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 170−180
+2371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 483
+9560%
Valorant 24−27 400−450
+1535%

Full HD
Ultra

Dota 2 7−8 184
+2529%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 280−290
+14000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 170−180
+2371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 255
+5000%
Valorant 24−27 400−450
+1535%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 206
+20500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 0−1 170−180

1440p
Ultra

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 179
+17800%

4K
High

Far Cry 6 5−6 104
+1980%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 175
+1150%
Valorant 4−5 300−350
+7850%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2 95−100
+9500%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2 75−80
+7800%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 300−350 300−350
Cyberpunk 2077 237 237

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 288 288
Cyberpunk 2077 212 212
Far Cry 5 196 196
Fortnite 300−350 300−350

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Counter-Strike 2 268 268
Cyberpunk 2077 190 190
Far Cry 5 187 187
Far Cry 6 193 193
Fortnite 300−350 300−350
Grand Theft Auto V 173 173
Metro Exodus 146 146

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 179 179
Far Cry 5 173 173

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350 300−350

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550 500−550
Far Cry 6 168 168
Grand Theft Auto V 159 159
Metro Exodus 135 135
Valorant 450−500 450−500

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 180−190 180−190
Cyberpunk 2077 122 122
Far Cry 5 173 173
Forza Horizon 4 240−250 240−250

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160 150−160

4K
High

Atomic Heart 65−70 65−70
Counter-Strike 2 50 50
Metro Exodus 87 87
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 156 156

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140 130−140
Counter-Strike 2 100−105 100−105
Cyberpunk 2077 60 60
Dota 2 153 153
Far Cry 5 132 132
Forza Horizon 4 200−210 200−210

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7900 XT is 20500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 7900 XT performs better in 21 tests (35%)
  • there's a draw in 39 tests (65%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.02 69.59
Recency 1 March 2003 3 November 2022
Maximum RAM amount 32 MB 20 GB
Chip lithography 150 nm 5 nm

RX 7900 XT has a 347850% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, a 63900% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 97% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7900 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX Go 5200 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX Go 5200 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 7900 XT is a desktop one.

Other comparisons

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

Community ratings

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


4.1 27 votes

Rate GeForce FX Go 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 2658 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX Go 5200 or Radeon RX 7900 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.