NVS 5200M vs GeForce GT 620M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 620M with NVS 5200M, including specs and performance data.

GT 620M
2012
1 GB DDR3, 15 Watt
1.13

NVS 5200M outperforms GT 620M by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10771027
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.163.65
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameGF108GF117
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date23 August 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2012 (12 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 cores9696
Core clock speedUp to 625 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed715 MHzno data
Number of transistors585 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate10.5610.00
Floating-point processing power0.2534 TFLOPS0.24 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs1616

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 sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16MXM

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus widthUp to 128bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthUp to 28.8 GB/s14.4 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 outputsNo outputs
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

3D Blu-Ray+-
Optimus++

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 620M 1.13
NVS 5200M 1.33
+17.7%

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.

GT 620M 437
NVS 5200M 511
+16.9%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GT 620M 934
NVS 5200M 1008
+8%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 620M 4219
NVS 5200M 4268
+1.2%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GT 620M 738
+4.8%
NVS 5200M 704

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GT 620M 5269
+6.5%
NVS 5200M 4949

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

GT 620M 2121
NVS 5200M 2196
+3.5%

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 HD40
+344%
9
−344%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7.7%
14−16
+7.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.1%
30−35
+3.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 1−2
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1

This is how GT 620M and NVS 5200M compete in popular games:

  • GT 620M is 344% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the NVS 5200M is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • NVS 5200M is ahead in 30 tests (65%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (35%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.13 1.33
Recency 23 August 2012 1 June 2012
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

GT 620M has an age advantage of 2 months, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

NVS 5200M, on the other hand, has a 17.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The NVS 5200M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 620M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 620M is a notebook graphics card while NVS 5200M is a mobile workstation 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 GT 620M
GeForce GT 620M
NVIDIA NVS 5200M
NVS 5200M

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.


3.3 446 votes

Rate GeForce GT 620M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 147 votes

Rate NVS 5200M 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.