ATI Radeon 9200 LE vs Quadro M1000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5991600
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.71no data
Power efficiency13.03no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameGM107RV280
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date18 August 2015 (10 years ago)1 May 2003 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$200.89 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores512no data
Core clock speed993 MHz250 MHz
Boost clock speed1072 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate31.781.000
Floating-point processing power1.017 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs324
L1 Cache256 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno 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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount2 GB/4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1253 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Display Port1.2no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-
3D Vision Pro+no data
Mosaic+no data
nView Display Management+no data
Optimus+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX128.1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.51.4
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA5.0-

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.

M1000M 2836
+141700%
Samples: 1964
ATI 9200 LE 2
Samples: 13

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD39no data
4K13no data

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.15no data
4K15.45no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 no data

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30−33 no data
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Fortnite 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Forza Horizon 5 20−22 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 no data
Valorant 75−80 no data

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 30−33 no data
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 no data
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Dota 2 50−55 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Fortnite 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Forza Horizon 5 20−22 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19 no data
Valorant 75−80 no data

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−33 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16 no data
Dota 2 50−55 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 12−14 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11 no data
Valorant 75−80 no data

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 no data

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14 no data
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8 no data
Metro Exodus 7−8 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 no data
Valorant 75−80 no data

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 12−14 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6 no data
Far Cry 5 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 7−8 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11 no data

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16 no data

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3 no data
Metro Exodus 2−3 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7 no data
Valorant 35−40 no data

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7 no data
Counter-Strike 2 0−1 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 no data
Dota 2 24−27 no data
Far Cry 5 6−7 no data
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 no data
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 no data

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8 no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 18 August 2015 1 May 2003
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB/4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 28 Watt

M1000M has an age advantage of 12 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9200 LE, on the other hand, has 42.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Quadro M1000M and Radeon 9200 LE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon 9200 LE is a desktop one.

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 Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M
ATI Radeon 9200 LE
Radeon 9200 LE

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 607 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 LE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro M1000M or Radeon 9200 LE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.