GeForce 6200 vs GeForce PCX 5750
GeForce 6200
Popular choices:
GeForce PCX 5750
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 6200 is positioned at rank 734 and the GeForce PCX 5750 is on rank 366, so the GeForce PCX 5750 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 6200
Performance Per Dollar GeForce PCX 5750
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 6200 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2010). The GeForce 6200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce PCX 5750 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 6200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (256 MB vs 128 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce PCX 5750.
| Insight | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.7%) |
| Longevity | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) |
| 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 6200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $15 for the GeForce PCX 5750, it costs 33% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 58.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+58.6%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($15) |
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 6200 and GeForce PCX 5750
GeForce 6200
The GeForce 6200 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: 37 points.
GeForce PCX 5750
The GeForce PCX 5750 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 7 2010. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 219W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 6200 scores 37 versus the GeForce PCX 5750's 35 — the GeForce 6200 leads by 5.7%. The GeForce 6200 is built on Pascal while the GeForce PCX 5750 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 14 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 6200) vs 480 (GeForce PCX 5750). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 6200) vs 1.405 TFLOPS (GeForce PCX 5750).
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 37+6% | 35 |
| Architecture | Pascal | Fermi 2.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 480+25% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7972 TFLOPS | 1.405 TFLOPS+76% |
| ROPs | 16 | 40+150% |
| TMUs | 24 | 60+150% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 960 KB+567% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 640 KB+25% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 6200 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce PCX 5750 has 128 MB. The GeForce 6200 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce 6200) vs 640 KB (GeForce PCX 5750) — the GeForce PCX 5750 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB+100% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 640 KB+25% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce 6200) vs 9.0a (GeForce PCX 5750). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 1.5. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 9.0a |
| Vulkan | None | N/A |
| OpenGL | 2.1+40% | 1.5 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 6200) vs None (GeForce PCX 5750). Decoder: PureVideo vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce 6200) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce PCX 5750).
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo | None |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 6200 draws 10W versus the GeForce PCX 5750's 219W — a 182.5% difference. The GeForce 6200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 6200) vs 350W (GeForce PCX 5750). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 168mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 80.
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 10W-95% | 219W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | 168mm |
| Height | 100mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-19% | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 3.7+1750% | 0.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 6200 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the GeForce PCX 5750 launched at $150 and now averages $15. The GeForce 6200 costs 33.3% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.7 (GeForce 6200) vs 2.3 (GeForce PCX 5750) — the GeForce 6200 offers 60.9% better value. The GeForce 6200 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce 6200 | GeForce PCX 5750 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129-14% | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-33% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.7+61% | 2.3 |
| Codename | GP108B | GF110 |
| Release | February 20 2019 | December 7 2010 |
| Ranking | #643 | #497 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 6200 and GeForce PCX 5750
