GeForce2 Go vs GeForce 810A
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 810A and GeForce2 Go, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
810A outperforms by a whopping 15600% 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 | 1005 | 1582 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.06 | 0.39 |
| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015) | Celsius (1999−2005) |
| GPU code name | GK208 | NV11 B2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 July 2014 (11 years ago) | 11 November 2000 (25 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 192 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 719 MHz | 143 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 758 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 915 million | 20 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 2 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.13 | 0.57 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2911 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 2 |
| TMUs | 16 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | no 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | AGP 4x |
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 | DDR3 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 64 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 166 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 5.312 GB/s |
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 | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 7.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 1.2 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | 3.5 | - |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.57 | 0.01 |
| Recency | 22 July 2014 | 11 November 2000 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 2 Watt |
GeForce 810A has a 15600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 543% more advanced lithography process.
GeForce2 Go, on the other hand, has 650% lower power consumption.
The GeForce 810A is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce2 Go in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
