Arc A750 vs GeForce 9200M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9200M with Arc A750, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 9200M
2008
12 Watt
0.37

Arc A750 outperforms 9200M by a whopping 8532% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1284180
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data57.94
Power efficiency2.129.75
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameC79DG2-512
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 October 2008 (16 years ago)12 October 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

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 cores163584
Core clock speed450 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors314 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate3.600537.6
Floating-point processing power0.0384 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs4112
TMUs8224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GeForce 9200M 0.37
Arc A750 31.94
+8532%

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.

GeForce 9200M 143
Arc A750 12305
+8505%

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 HD1−2
−11000%
111
+11000%
1440p0−158
4K-0−136

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.60
1440pno data4.98
4Kno data8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 164
+0%
164
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 91
+0%
91
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 75
+0%
75
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 123
+0%
123
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 88
+0%
88
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 66
+0%
66
+0%
Far Cry 5 111
+0%
111
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+0%
112
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 89
+0%
89
+0%
Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 76
+0%
76
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 58
+0%
58
+0%
Far Cry 5 102
+0%
102
+0%
Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 106
+0%
106
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 99
+0%
99
+0%
Metro Exodus 105
+0%
105
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 185
+0%
185
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 75
+0%
75
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 55
+0%
55
+0%
Far Cry 5 98
+0%
98
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 90
+0%
90
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Valorant 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 65
+0%
65
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 42
+0%
42
+0%
Far Cry 5 76
+0%
76
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 79
+0%
79
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57
+0%
57
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45
+0%
45
+0%
Metro Exodus 43
+0%
43
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69
+0%
69
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 23
+0%
23
+0%
Far Cry 5 45
+0%
45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

This is how GeForce 9200M and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 11000% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.37 31.94
Recency 15 October 2008 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 225 Watt

GeForce 9200M has 1775% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 8532.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9200M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9200M is a notebook card while Arc A750 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 9200M
GeForce 9200M
Intel Arc A750
Arc A750

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.


1.5 2 votes

Rate GeForce 9200M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 889 votes

Rate Arc A750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9200M or Arc A750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.