AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino) vs NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino) and NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: Geekbench - OpenCL, PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino)
- Videocard is newer: launch date 14 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- 2.7x more core clock speed: 1500 MHz vs 550 MHz
- 3454.5x more texture fill rate: 15.20 GTexel/s vs 4.4 GTexel / s
- 16x more pipelines: 128 vs 8
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 6 nm vs 65 nm
Launch date | 20 Sep 2022 vs 3 June 2008 |
Core clock speed | 1500 MHz vs 550 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 15.20 GTexel/s vs 4.4 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 128 vs 8 |
Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm vs 65 nm |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS
- Around 15% lower typical power consumption: 13 Watt vs 15 Watt
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt vs 15 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino)
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS
Name | AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino) | NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS |
---|---|---|
Geekbench - OpenCL | 5019 | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 129 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 46 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 882 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 882 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon 610M (Mendocino) | NVIDIA GeForce 9200M GS | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Tesla |
Code name | Mendocino | G98 |
Launch date | 20 Sep 2022 | 3 June 2008 |
Place in performance rating | 1644 | 1643 |
Type | Laptop | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1900 MHz | |
Compute units | 2 | |
Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 550 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 6 nm | 65 nm |
Peak Double Precision (FP64) Performance | 30.40 GFLOPS (1:16) | |
Peak Half Precision (FP16) Performance | 972.8 GFLOPS (2:1) | |
Peak Single Precision (FP32) Performance | 486.4 GFLOPS | |
Pipelines | 128 | 8 |
Pixel fill rate | 7.600 GPixel/s | |
Texture fill rate | 15.20 GTexel/s | 4.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 13 Watt |
CUDA cores | 8 | |
Floating-point performance | 22.4 gflops | |
Gigaflops | 31 | |
Transistor count | 210 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Form factor | IGP | |
Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 10.0 |
OpenCL | 2.0 | |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
Shader Model | 6.7 | |
Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 256 MB |
Memory bandwidth | System Dependent | 11.2 GB / s |
Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1400 MHz |
Memory type | System Shared | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA |