GeForce 8200 vs GT 820M

Place in the ranking	993	1254
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.62	0.68
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GF117	C78
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	27 November 2013 (11 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 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 cores	96	16
Core clock speed	775 MHz	500 MHz
Number of transistors	585 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	12.40	4.000
Floating-point processing power	0.2976 TFLOPS	0.0384 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	4
TMUs	16	8

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCI
Width	no data	IGP

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 type	DDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	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 Connectors

No outputs

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	2.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 820M 1.45
+263%

GeForce 8200 0.40

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.

GT 820M 559
+261%

GeForce 8200 155

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.45	0.40
Recency	27 November 2013	17 April 2007
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	40 Watt

GT 820M has a 262.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 166.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 820M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8200 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 820M is a notebook card while GeForce 8200 is a desktop one.

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