GeForce Go 6400 vs 8200M G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8200M G and GeForce Go 6400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.


8200M G
2008
0.16
+167%

8200M G outperforms Go 6400 by a whopping 167% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14881543
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Architectureno dataCurie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameMCP77MV MCP79MVLNV44 A2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 June 2008 (17 years ago)1 February 2006 (20 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 cores87
Core clock speed400 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data75 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm110 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.600
ROPsno data2
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16

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 typeno dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data32 MB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data350 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data5.6 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX109.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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.

8200M G 0.16
+167%
Go 6400 0.06

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.

8200M G 65
+171%
Samples: 366
Go 6400 24
Samples: 4

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 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
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
+10%
10−11
−10%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Ultra

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

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra

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

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the 8200M G is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8200M G performs better in 9 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 0.06
Recency 3 June 2008 1 February 2006
Chip lithography 80 nm 110 nm

8200M G has a 167% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 38% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 8200M G is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6400 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.

Community ratings

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


3.5 39 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 3 votes

Rate GeForce Go 6400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8200M G or GeForce Go 6400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.