GeForce 6200 TurboCache vs NVS 300

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 300 with GeForce 6200 TurboCache, including specs and performance data.

NVS 300
2011
512 MB DDR3, 18 Watt
0.31
+121%

NVS 300 outperforms 6200 TurboCache by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13131423
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.20no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameGT218NV44 B2
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date8 January 2011 (13 years ago)15 December 2004 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 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 cores16no data
Core clock speed520 MHz350 MHz
Number of transistors260 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Wattno data
Texture fill rate4.1601.400
Floating-point processing power0.03936 TFLOPSno data
ROPs42
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
Length145 mm165 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB64 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz250 MHz
Memory bandwidth12.64 GB/s4 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DMS-591x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model4.13.0
OpenGL3.32.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.2-

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.

NVS 300 0.31
+121%
6200 TurboCache 0.14

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.

NVS 300 121
+128%
6200 TurboCache 53

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 0.31 0.14
Recency 8 January 2011 15 December 2004
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 64 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 110 nm

NVS 300 has a 121.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 175% more advanced lithography process.

The NVS 300 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6200 TurboCache in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 300 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 6200 TurboCache 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 NVS 300
NVS 300
NVIDIA GeForce 6200 TurboCache
GeForce 6200 TurboCache

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.


3.2 45 votes

Rate NVS 300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 59 votes

Rate GeForce 6200 TurboCache 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.