Radeon Pro WX 8200 vs GeForce2 MX
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1600 | 211 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 7.65 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 10.08 |
| Architecture | Celsius (1999−2005) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | NV11 A2 | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 28 June 2000 (25 years ago) | 13 August 2018 (7 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $999 |
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 | no data | 3584 |
| Core clock speed | 175 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 20 million | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 180 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 230 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 0.7 | 336.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 10.75 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 2 | 64 |
| TMUs | 4 | 224 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 896 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 4 MB |
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 | AGP 4x | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | 1-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
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 | SDR | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 166 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 2.656 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
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 | 1x VGA | 4x mini-DisplayPort |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 7.0 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 1.2 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.125 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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
| Recency | 28 June 2000 | 13 August 2018 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 180 nm | 14 nm |
Pro WX 8200 has an age advantage of 18 years, a 25500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1186% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce2 MX and Radeon Pro WX 8200. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that GeForce2 MX is a desktop graphics card while Radeon Pro WX 8200 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
