GeForce 256 vs RADEON 9200
GeForce 256
Popular choices:
RADEON 9200
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 256 is positioned at rank 750 and the RADEON 9200 is on rank 748, so the RADEON 9200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 256
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 256 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9200.
| Insight | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+25%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-25%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) (28nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 256 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $20 versus $25 for the RADEON 9200, it costs 20% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 56.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+56.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($25) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 256 and RADEON 9200
GeForce 256
The GeForce 256 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5 points.
RADEON 9200
The RADEON 9200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 1024 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 256 scores 5 versus the RADEON 9200's 4 — the GeForce 256 leads by 25%. The GeForce 256 is built on Pascal while the RADEON 9200 uses GCN 3.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 256) vs 384 (RADEON 9200). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 256) vs 0.7864 TFLOPS (RADEON 9200). Boost clocks: 1038 MHz vs 1024 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5+25% | 4 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS+1% | 0.7864 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz+1% | 1024 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB+50% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+300% | 128 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 256 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9200 has 256 MB. The GeForce 256 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce 256) vs 128 KB (RADEON 9200) — the GeForce 256 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+300% | 128 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 256 draws 10W versus the RADEON 9200's 50W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce 256 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 256) vs 350W (RADEON 9200). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-80% | 50W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 165mm | — |
| Height | 100mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.5+400% | 0.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 256 launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the RADEON 9200 launched at $99 and now averages $25. The GeForce 256 costs 20% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.3 (GeForce 256) vs 0.2 (RADEON 9200) — the GeForce 256 offers 50% better value.
| Feature | GeForce 256 | RADEON 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | $99-50% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-20% | $25 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.3+50% | 0.2 |
| Codename | GP108B | Polaris 24 |
| Release | February 20 2019 | May 13 2019 |
| Ranking | #643 | #898 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 256 and RADEON 9200
