GMA X3000 vs GeForce 8200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1254not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.69no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameC78Broadwater
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 April 2007 (17 years ago)1 June 2006 (18 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 cores16no data
Core clock speed500 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate4.0004.000
Floating-point processing power0.0384 TFLOPSno data
ROPs41
TMUs88

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).

InterfacePCIPCIe 1.0 x16
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)9.0c
Shader Model4.03.0
OpenGL3.32.0
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 April 2007 1 June 2006
Chip lithography 80 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 13 Watt

GeForce 8200 has an age advantage of 10 months, and a 12.5% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X3000, on the other hand, has 207.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8200 and GMA X3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 8200 is a desktop card while GMA X3000 is a notebook one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 8200
GeForce 8200
Intel GMA X3000
GMA X3000

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.


2.7 61 vote

Rate GeForce 8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 30 votes

Rate GMA X3000 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.