GeForce 9200 vs ATI Radeon X1600 XT

Place in the ranking	1329	1245
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.49	0.75
Architecture	R500 (2005−2007)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	RV530	C79
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	1 October 2007 (17 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 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	no data	16
Core clock speed	590 MHz	450 MHz
Number of transistors	157 million	314 million
Manufacturing process technology	90 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	42 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	2.360	3.600
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.0352 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	4
TMUs	4	8

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	PCI
Width	1-slot	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	690 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	22.08 GB/s	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 Connectors

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	3.0	4.0
OpenGL	2.0	3.3
OpenCL	N/A	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI X1600 XT 0.30

GeForce 9200 0.44
+46.7%

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 X1600 XT 115

GeForce 9200 169
+47%

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	0.30	0.44
Recency	1 October 2007	17 April 2007
Chip lithography	90 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	42 Watt	40 Watt

ATI X1600 XT has an age advantage of 5 months.

GeForce 9200, on the other hand, has a 46.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 38.5% more advanced lithography process, and 5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 9200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 XT in performance tests.

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