NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G vs NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G and NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- 2.5x more core clock speed: 800 MHz vs 325 MHz
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 3.2 GTexel / s vs 1.3 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 80 nm vs 150 nm
- 2x more maximum memory size: 256 MB vs 128 MB
- 7.1x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 85 vs 12
- Around 75% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 242 vs 138
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 1 February 2008 vs 6 March 2003 |
Core clock speed | 800 MHz vs 325 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 3.2 GTexel / s vs 1.3 GTexel / s |
Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm vs 150 nm |
Maximum memory size | 256 MB vs 128 MB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 85 vs 12 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 242 vs 138 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
- Around 8% higher memory clock speed: 650 MHz vs 600 MHz
Memory clock speed | 650 MHz vs 600 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G | NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 85 | 12 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 242 | 138 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 778 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 778 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 9300M G | NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 Ultra | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Tesla | Rankine |
Code name | G86 | NV34 A2 |
Launch date | 1 February 2008 | 6 March 2003 |
Place in performance rating | 1175 | 1177 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Launch price (MSRP) | $149 | |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 800 MHz | 325 MHz |
CUDA cores | 16 | |
Floating-point performance | 25.6 gflops | |
Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 150 nm |
Pipelines | 16 | |
Texture fill rate | 3.2 GTexel / s | 1.3 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 13 Watt | |
Transistor count | 210 million | 45 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | AGP 8x |
Length | 171 mm | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x Molex | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 10.0 | 9.0a |
OpenGL | 3.3 | 1.5 (2.1) |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 128 MB |
Memory bandwidth | 9.6 GB / s | 10.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | 650 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR2 / GDDR3 | DDR |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Gigathread technology | ||
HDCP-capable | ||
HDR (High Dynamic-Range Lighting) | ||
PCI-E 16x | ||
PowerMizer 7.0 |