Radeon Vega 3 Efficient vs GeForce 2 Go (200 / 100)
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | no data | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | NV11 | Raven |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 March 2001 (23 years ago) | 26 May 2018 (5 years ago) |
| Current price | $125 | $562 |
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 1 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 166 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,940 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 180 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 12.00 |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce 2 Go (200 / 100) and Radeon Vega 3 Efficient compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | no data | IGP |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | DDR | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 32 / 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DDR | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1.2.131 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 March 2001 | 26 May 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | System Shared |
| Chip lithography | 180 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2 Watt | 15 Watt |
We couldn't decide between GeForce 2 Go (200 / 100) and Radeon Vega 3 Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce 2 Go (200 / 100) is a notebook card while Radeon Vega 3 Efficient is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
