GeForce 3 Go vs 920A

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking855not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.55no data
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)no data
GPU code nameGK208Bno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)1 February 2002 (22 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 cores384no data
Core clock speed954 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data250 MHz
Number of transistors915 million27 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt2 Watt
Texture fill rate30.53no data
Floating-point processing power0.7327 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs32no data

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no 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 amount2 GB64 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit32 / 64 / 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1001 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth16.02 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DDR
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA3.5-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 March 2015 1 February 2002
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 64 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 2 Watt

GeForce 920A has an age advantage of 13 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 435.7% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 3 Go, on the other hand, has 1550% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 920A and GeForce 3 Go. We've got no test results to judge.


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 920A
GeForce 920A
NVIDIA GeForce 3 Go
GeForce 3 Go

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.


3.5 13 votes

Rate GeForce 920A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 5 votes

Rate GeForce 3 Go 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.