Radeon 760M vs GeForce FX Go 5200

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX Go 5200 and Radeon 760M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

FX Go 5200
2003
32 MB DDR
0.02

760M outperforms FX Go 5200 by a whopping 63600% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1501367
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data67.14
Architectureno dataRDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameNV31MHawx Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 March 2003 (22 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 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 cores5512
Core clock speed1 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed300 MHz2599 MHz
Number of transistorsno data25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data83.17
Floating-point processing powerno data5.323 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 dataPCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount32 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed300 MHzSystem Shared
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 dataPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDDR12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1
Vulkan-1.3

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.

FX Go 5200 0.02
Radeon 760M 12.74
+63600%

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.

FX Go 5200 8
Radeon 760M 5692
+71050%

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-0−130
1440p-0−118

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−3800%
39
+3800%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2900%
30
+2900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−2800%
29
+2800%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2300%
24
+2300%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−750%
50−55
+750%
Valorant 24−27
−383%
110−120
+383%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−2000%
180−190
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1700%
18
+1700%
Dota 2 8−9
−1013%
85−90
+1013%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−750%
50−55
+750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−1100%
36
+1100%
Valorant 24−27
−383%
110−120
+383%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2800%
27−30
+2800%
Dota 2 8−9
−1013%
85−90
+1013%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−750%
50−55
+750%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−667%
23
+667%
Valorant 24−27
−383%
110−120
+383%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 0−1 120−130

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 30−35

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−73.3%
24−27
+73.3%
Valorant 1−2
−7500%
75−80
+7500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−1200%
12−14
+1200%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−550%
12−14
+550%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 105
+0%
105
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 77
+0%
77
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+0%
35
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 760M is 7500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is ahead in 26 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.02 12.74
Recency 1 March 2003 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 150 nm 4 nm

Radeon 760M has a 63600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 20 years, and a 3650% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX Go 5200 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 FX Go 5200
GeForce FX Go 5200
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.9 18 votes

Rate GeForce FX Go 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 241 vote

Rate Radeon 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX Go 5200 or Radeon 760M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.