GeForce 6200 TurboCache vs Radeon R5 230

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 230 and GeForce 6200 TurboCache, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 230
2014
4 GB DDR3, 19 Watt
0.57
+307%

R5 230 outperforms 6200 TurboCache by a whopping 307% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12091426
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.06no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameCaicosNV44 B2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date3 April 2014 (10 years ago)15 December 2004 (20 years 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 cores160no data
Core clock speedno data350 MHz
Number of transistors370 million75 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Wattno data
Texture fill rate5.0001.400
Floating-point processing power0.2 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).

Bus supportPCIe 1.0 x4no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 4x
Length168 mm165 mm
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano 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 amount4 GB64 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data250 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
​PowerPlay+no data
DDMA audio-no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 119.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.03.0
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan-N/A

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.

R5 230 0.57
+307%
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.

R5 230 221
+317%
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 0.57 0.14
Recency 3 April 2014 15 December 2004
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 110 nm

R5 230 has a 307.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 175% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 230 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6200 TurboCache 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 R5 230
Radeon R5 230
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.


2.8 241 vote

Rate Radeon R5 230 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.