GeForce 8200M G vs Radeon Pro W5700

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro W5700 with GeForce 8200M G, including specs and performance data.

Pro W5700
2019, $799
8 GB GDDR6, 205 Watt
33.91
+21094%

Pro W5700 outperforms 8200M G by a whopping 21094% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1711500
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation14.09no data
Power efficiency12.80no data
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)no data
GPU code nameNavi 10MCP77MV MCP79MVL
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date19 November 2019 (6 years ago)3 June 2008 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data

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 cores23048
Core clock speed1243 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1930 MHzno data
Number of transistors10,300 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology7 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)205 Wattno data
Texture fill rate277.9no data
Floating-point processing power8.893 TFLOPSno data
ROPs64no data
TMUs144no data
L2 Cache4 MBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 4.0 x16no data
Length305 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1750 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/sno data
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 Connectors5x mini-DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-Cno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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.

Pro W5700 33.91
+21094%
8200M G 0.16

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.

Pro W5700 14128
+21635%
Samples: 403
8200M G 65
Samples: 366

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Palworld 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Palworld 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Palworld 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 25 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.91 0.16
Recency 19 November 2019 3 June 2008
Chip lithography 7 nm 80 nm

Pro W5700 has a 21094% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 1043% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W5700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8200M G in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro W5700 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 8200M G is a notebook 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.


4.1 124 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W5700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 40 votes

Rate GeForce 8200M G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro W5700 or GeForce 8200M G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.