GeForce Go 7200 vs GTX 770M

Place in the ranking	538	1439
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	4.39	no data
Power efficiency	6.74	no data
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	GK106	G72
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	30 May 2013 (11 years ago)	1 September 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$189.99	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	960	7
Core clock speed	811 MHz	450 MHz
Boost clock speed	797 MHz	450 MHz
Number of transistors	2,540 million	112 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	63.76	1.800
Floating-point processing power	1.53 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	24	1
TMUs	80	4

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 size	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 1.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	64 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	192 Bit	32 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	350 MHz
Memory bandwidth	96.0 GB/s	2.8 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	5.1	3.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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.

GTX 770M 7.25
+5942%

Go 7200 0.12

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.

GTX 770M 2797
+6116%

Go 7200 45

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

0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.88

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

12−14
+500%

2−3

−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11	0−1
Battlefield 5	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	0−1
Hitman 3	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +438%	8−9 −438%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +92.9%	27−30 −92.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11	0−1
Battlefield 5	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	20−22	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	0−1
Hitman 3	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +438%	8−9 −438%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +144%	9−10 −144%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +92.9%	27−30 −92.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−11	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	0−1
Hitman 3	14−16 +250%	4−5 −250%
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +438%	8−9 −438%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +144%	9−10 −144%
Watch Dogs: Legion	50−55 +92.9%	27−30 −92.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

20−22

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	10−12	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	8−9	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	24−27	0−1
Hitman 3	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +650%	2−3 −650%
Metro Exodus	8−9	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50	0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+500%

2−3

−500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6	0−1
Hitman 3	3−4	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	24−27	0−1
Metro Exodus	5−6	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	3−4	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	8−9	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	2−3	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+250%

2−3

−250%

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 770M is 650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 770M surpassed Go 7200 in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.25	0.12
Recency	30 May 2013	1 September 2006
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	64 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	90 nm

GTX 770M has a 5941.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 4700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 770M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7200 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.