Radeon Vega 7 vs GeForce Go 6200

Place in the ranking	1485	533
Place by popularity	not in top-100	12
Power efficiency	0.17	11.44
Architecture	Curie (2003−2013)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	NV44 A2	Cezanne
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2006 (18 years ago)	13 April 2021 (3 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 cores	7	448
Core clock speed	300 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	300 MHz	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	75 million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	110 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	16 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	1.200	53.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	2	8
TMUs	4	28

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	DDR	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	32 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	64 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	300 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	4.8 GB/s	no data
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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	3.0	6.4
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.2

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	23
1440p	-0−1	25
4K	-0−1	15

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −87.5%	14−16 +87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −87.5%	14−16 +87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −625%	29 +625%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −800%	27 +800%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −87.5%	14−16 +87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −460%	28 +460%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −500%	24 +500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −1050%	46 +1050%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −600%	21−24 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −475%	21−24 +475%
World of Tanks	8−9 −625%	58 +625%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −87.5%	14−16 +87.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%
Far Cry 5	5−6 −560%	30−35 +560%
Forza Horizon 4	4−5 −425%	21 +425%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −1400%	60−65 +1400%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −17400%	350−400 +17400%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%
Valorant	4−5 −375%	18−20 +375%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −18567%	2800−2850 +18567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −17900%	180−190 +17900%
Dota 2	14−16 −18567%	2800−2850 +18567%
Valorant	0−1	7−8

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Metro Exodus	21 +0%	21 +0%
Valorant	29 +0%	29 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	17 +0%	17 +0%
Elden Ring	16 +0%	16 +0%
Fortnite	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Metro Exodus	15 +0%	15 +0%
Valorant	14 +0%	14 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	25 +0%	25 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Elden Ring	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Elden Ring	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Vega 7 is 1400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Vega 7 is ahead in 20 tests (41%)
there's a draw in 29 tests (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.04	7.48
Recency	1 February 2006	13 April 2021
Chip lithography	110 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	16 Watt	45 Watt

Go 6200 has 181.3% lower power consumption.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has a 18600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, and a 1471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6200 in performance tests.

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