Radeon HD 6290 IGP vs GeForce GT 220

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1212not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.67no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGT216Loveland
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)7 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores4880
Core clock speed625 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors486 million450 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt9 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate9.8403.200
Floating-point processing power0.1277 TFLOPS0.064 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs168

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed790 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.3 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsVGADVIHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 12 October 2009 7 January 2011
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 9 Watt

HD 6290 IGP has an age advantage of 1 year, and 544.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 220 and Radeon HD 6290 IGP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 220 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 6290 IGP is a notebook one.


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 GT 220
GeForce GT 220
AMD Radeon HD 6290 IGP
Radeon HD 6290 IGP

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.


3.1 776 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon HD 6290 IGP 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.