ATI Radeon 9200 vs R7 (Carrizo)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 (Carrizo) with Radeon 9200, including specs and performance data.

R7 (Carrizo)
2015
12 Watt
1.73
+17200%

R7 (Carrizo) outperforms ATI 9200 by a whopping 17200% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9011529
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.940.03
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameCarrizoRV280
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date4 June 2015 (9 years ago)1 May 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 cores512no data
Core clock speedno data250 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors2410 Million36 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rateno data1.000
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Interfaceno dataAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 data128 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)8.1
OpenGLno data1.4
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD10-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12 0−1
Valorant 35−40 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6 0−1
Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Dota 2 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Fortnite 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6 0−1
Valorant 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Dota 2 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8 0−1
Valorant 35−40 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 0−1
Valorant 12−14 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Valorant 10−11 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.73 0.01
Recency 4 June 2015 1 May 2003
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 28 Watt

R7 (Carrizo) has a 17200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 435.7% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9200 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 (Carrizo) is a notebook card while Radeon 9200 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.


AMD Radeon R7 (Carrizo)
Radeon R7 (Carrizo)
ATI Radeon 9200
Radeon 9200

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.


3.4 7 votes

Rate Radeon R7 (Carrizo) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 52 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 (Carrizo) or Radeon 9200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.