GeForce 6200 TurboCache vs HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) with GeForce 6200 TurboCache, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
2012
0.63
+350%

HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) outperforms 6200 TurboCache by a whopping 350% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11971425
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2012)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1NV44 B2
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 October 2012 (12 years ago)15 December 2004 (20 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 cores6no data
Core clock speed350 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data75 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm110 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.400
ROPsno data2
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataAGP 4x
Lengthno data165 mm
Widthno data1-slot

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 typeno dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data64 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data4 GB/s
Shared memory+no 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 data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.09.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD8
+700%
1−2
−700%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+400%
6−7
−400%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1

This is how HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and 6200 TurboCache compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is 700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.63 0.14
Recency 1 October 2012 15 December 2004
Chip lithography 22 nm 110 nm

HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) has a 350% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6200 TurboCache in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is a notebook card while GeForce 6200 TurboCache is a desktop 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.


Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
NVIDIA GeForce 6200 TurboCache
GeForce 6200 TurboCache

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.


2.9 46 votes

Rate HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 59 votes

Rate GeForce 6200 TurboCache 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.