Matrox Parhelia 256 MB vs GeForce GT 520M

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1158not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency4.30no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Parhelia (2002−2006)
GPU code nameGF108Parhelia-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 January 2011 (13 years ago)25 June 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$59.99 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 cores48no data
Core clock speed600 MHz200 MHz
Number of transistors585 million80 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Wattno data
Texture fill rate4.8000.8
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPSno data
ROPs44
TMUs84

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Lengthno data175 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/s16 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent2x DVI

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API8.1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.51.5
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 January 2011 25 June 2002
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm

GT 520M has an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 520M and Matrox Parhelia 256 MB. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GT 520M is a notebook card while Matrox Parhelia 256 MB is a desktop 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 520M
GeForce GT 520M
Matrox Parhelia 256 MB
Parhelia 256 MB

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.


3 406 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.6 10 votes

Rate Matrox Parhelia 256 MB 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.