GeForce 3 Go vs Iris Pro Graphics 5200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking760not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.10no data
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)no data
GPU code nameHaswell GT3eno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 May 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2002 (22 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 cores320no data
Core clock speed200 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1200 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors392 million27 Million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt2 Watt
Texture fill rate48.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs40no data

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
InterfaceRing Busno data

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 typeSystem shared + 128 MB eDRAMDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem shared64 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared32 / 64 / 128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)DDR
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.3no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 May 2013 1 February 2002
Chip lithography 22 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 2 Watt

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 581.8% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 3 Go, on the other hand, has 2150% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and GeForce 3 Go. We've got no test results to judge.


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 Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
NVIDIA GeForce 3 Go
GeForce 3 Go

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.


2.8 162 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 5 votes

Rate GeForce 3 Go 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.