GeForce FX Go 5200 vs Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) and GeForce FX Go 5200, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
2014
0.65
+3150%

R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) outperforms FX Go 5200 by a whopping 3150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11911489
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)no data
GPU code nameBeema/MullinsNV31M
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year 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 cores1285
Core clock speed300 MHz1 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHz300 MHz
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm

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 sizeno datamedium sized

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 typeno dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data32 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data300 MHz
Shared memory+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)DDR

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+7.1%
27−30
−7.1%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) is ahead in 26 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.02
Recency 29 April 2014 1 March 2003
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm

R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) has a 3150% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX Go 5200 in performance tests.


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.


AMD Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
NVIDIA GeForce FX Go 5200
GeForce FX Go 5200

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.


4.5 4 votes

Rate Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 17 votes

Rate GeForce FX Go 5200 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.