PG506-232 vs GeForce 8200

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1325not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.75no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameC78GA100
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date6 May 2008 (17 years ago)12 April 2021 (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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores163584
Core clock speed500 MHz930 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1440 MHz
Number of transistors210 million54,200 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt165 Watt
Texture fill rate4.000322.6
Floating-point processing power0.0384 TFLOPS10.32 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8224
Tensor Coresno data224
L1 Cacheno data10.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data24 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).

InterfacePCIPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data8-pin EPS

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 typeSystem SharedHBM2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared24 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared3072 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1215 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data933.1 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)N/A
Shader Model4.0N/A
OpenGL3.3N/A
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-8.0
DLSS-+

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 May 2008 12 April 2021
Chip lithography 80 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 165 Watt

GeForce 8200 has 312.5% lower power consumption.

PG506-232, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 12 years, and a 1042.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8200 and PG506-232. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 8200 is a desktop graphics card while PG506-232 is a workstation one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8200
GeForce 8200
NVIDIA PG506-232
PG506-232

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.


2.6 66 votes

Rate GeForce 8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate PG506-232 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8200 or PG506-232, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.