GeForce 8200M G mGPU vs GTX 260
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 821 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.14 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.21 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | GT200 | C77 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 16 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 3 June 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $449 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 192 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 576 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 210 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 182 Watt | 12 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 36.86 | 1.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4769 TFLOPS | 0.0256 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 28 | 4 |
| TMUs | 64 | 4 |
| L2 Cache | 224 KB | no data |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | no data |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | GDDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 896 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 448 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 111.9 GB/s | no data |
| 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 Connectors | Dual Link DVIHDTV | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 182 Watt | 12 Watt |
GTX 260 has a 23.1% more advanced lithography process.
8200M G mGPU, on the other hand, has 1416.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 and GeForce 8200M G mGPU AMD. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 8200M G mGPU AMD is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
