GeForce 6200 TurboCache vs Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition with GeForce 6200 TurboCache, including specs and performance data.
R9 M295X Mac Edition outperforms 6200 TurboCache by a whopping 9464% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 382 | 1425 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.73 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Amethyst | NV44 B2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 23 November 2014 (10 years ago) | 15 December 2004 (19 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 | 2048 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 5,000 million | 75 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 250 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 108.8 | 1.400 |
| Floating-point processing power | 3.482 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | 2 |
| TMUs | 128 | 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).
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | AGP 4x |
| Length | no data | 165 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-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 type | GDDR5 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 64 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1362 MHz | 250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 174.3 GB/s | 4 GB/s |
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 | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.39 | 0.14 |
| Recency | 23 November 2014 | 15 December 2004 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 64 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 110 nm |
R9 M295X Mac Edition has a 9464.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 6200 TurboCache in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
