Radeon 610M vs ATI 9200 PRO

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon 9200 PRO with Radeon 610M, including specs and performance data.

ATI 9200 PRO
2003
128 MB DDR, 28 Watt
0.01

610M outperforms ATI 9200 PRO by a whopping 28700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1538797
Place by popularitynot in top-10072
Power efficiency0.0213.19
ArchitectureRage 7 (2001−2006)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameRV280Dragon Range
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 May 2003 (21 year ago)3 January 2023 (2 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 coresno data128
Core clock speed239 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors36 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology150 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate0.9617.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.5632 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs48
Ray Tracing Coresno data2

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount128 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed164 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth5.248 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX8.112 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL1.44.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

ATI 9200 PRO 0.01
Radeon 610M 2.88
+28700%

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.

ATI 9200 PRO 2
Radeon 610M 1108
+55300%

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-0−113
1440p-0−161

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16
+0%
16
+0%
Metro Exodus 9
+0%
9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+0%
8
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Valorant 61
+0%
61
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.01 2.88
Recency 1 May 2003 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 150 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 610M has a 28700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 19 years, a 2900% more advanced lithography process, and 86.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 610M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9200 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon 9200 PRO is a desktop card while Radeon 610M is a notebook one.

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.


ATI Radeon 9200 PRO
Radeon 9200 PRO
AMD Radeon 610M
Radeon 610M

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 7 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 853 votes

Rate Radeon 610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon 9200 PRO or Radeon 610M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.