ATI Radeon IGP 350M vs GeForce FX Go 5200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Architectureno dataRage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameNV31MRS200
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 March 2003 (21 year ago)5 October 2002 (22 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 cores5no data
Core clock speed1 MHz183 MHz
Boost clock speed300 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data30 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm180 nm
Texture fill rateno data0.37
ROPsno data2
TMUsno data2

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Interfaceno dataAGP 4x
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount32 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed300 MHzSystem Shared
Shared memory-+

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXDDR7.0
OpenGLno data1.4
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

FX Go 5200 8
+33.3%
ATI IGP 350M 6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2003 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 150 nm 180 nm

FX Go 5200 has an age advantage of 4 months, and a 20% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce FX Go 5200 and Radeon IGP 350M. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 FX Go 5200
GeForce FX Go 5200
ATI Radeon IGP 350M
Radeon IGP 350M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 17 votes

Rate GeForce FX Go 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 9 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.