GeForce RTX 5090 vs 6200 TurboCache

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 6200 TurboCache and GeForce RTX 5090, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

6200 TurboCache
2004
64 MB DDR
0.14

RTX 5090 outperforms 6200 TurboCache by a whopping 71329% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14361
Place by popularitynot in top-10058
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data10.92
Power efficiencyno data12.12
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Blackwell 2.0 (2025)
GPU code nameNV44 B2GB202
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date15 December 2004 (20 years ago)30 January 2025 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 coresno data21760
Core clock speed350 MHz2017 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2407 MHz
Number of transistors75 million92,200 million
Manufacturing process technology110 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data575 Watt
Texture fill rate1.4001,637
Floating-point processing powerno data104.8 TFLOPS
ROPs2176
TMUs4680
Tensor Coresno data680
Ray Tracing Coresno data170

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 5.0 x16
Length165 mm304 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 16-pin

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 typeDDRGDDR7
Maximum RAM amount64 MB32 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit512 Bit
Memory clock speed250 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth4 GB/s1.79 TB/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 VGA, 1x S-Video1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.4
CUDA-10.1
DLSS-+

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.

6200 TurboCache 0.14
RTX 5090 100.00
+71329%

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.

6200 TurboCache 53
RTX 5090 38951
+73392%

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 HD-0−1203
1440p-0−1186
4K-0−1148

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data9.85
1440pno data10.75
4Kno data13.51

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Battlefield 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Far Cry 5 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 650−700
+0%
650−700
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Battlefield 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Far Cry 5 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 250−260
+0%
250−260
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Metro Exodus 69
+0%
69
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Valorant 650−700
+0%
650−700
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 202
+0%
202
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%
Far Cry 5 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 350
+0%
350
+0%
Valorant 650−700
+0%
650−700
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 183
+0%
183
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Metro Exodus 202
+0%
202
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Far Cry 5 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 321
+0%
321
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 128
+0%
128
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 174
+0%
174
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Metro Exodus 167
+0%
167
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 378
+0%
378
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 55
+0%
55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 100.00
Recency 15 December 2004 30 January 2025
Maximum RAM amount 64 MB 32 GB
Chip lithography 110 nm 5 nm

RTX 5090 has a 71328.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 20 years, a 51100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 5090 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6200 TurboCache in performance tests.

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 GeForce 6200 TurboCache
GeForce 6200 TurboCache
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 5090
GeForce RTX 5090

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.


3.1 59 votes

Rate GeForce 6200 TurboCache on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1870 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 5090 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 6200 TurboCache or GeForce RTX 5090, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.