GeForce 6200A vs GeForce2 MX 100/200

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 6200A is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce2 MX 100/200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 6200A remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

GeForce 6200A Benchmark Check

GeForce2 MX 100/200 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 6200A and GeForce2 MX 100/200

GeForce 6200A

The GeForce 6200A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 941 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.

GeForce2 MX 100/200

The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. 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: 3 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce 6200A scores 4 versus the GeForce2 MX 100/200's 3 — the GeForce 6200A leads by 33.3%. The GeForce 6200A is built on Maxwell while the GeForce2 MX 100/200 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 6200A) vs 384 (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Raw compute: 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce 6200A) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Boost clocks: 941 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
G3D Mark Score	4+33%	3
Architecture	Maxwell	Pascal
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	384	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7227 TFLOPS	0.7972 TFLOPS+10%
Boost Clock	941 MHz	1038 MHz+10%
ROPs	8	16+100%
TMUs	24	24
L1 Cache	192 KB+33%	144 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
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 6200A comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce2 MX 100/200 has 512 MB. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 6200A) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce2 MX 100/200) — the GeForce 6200A has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
VRAM Capacity	0.125 GB	0.5 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce 6200A) vs 7.0 (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 1.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
DirectX	9.0c+29%	7.0
Vulkan	None	N/A
OpenGL	2.1+75%	1.2
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 6200A) vs None (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Decoder: PureVideo vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce 6200A) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX 100/200).

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
Encoder	No	None
Decoder	PureVideo	None
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 6200A draws 33W versus the GeForce2 MX 100/200's 10W — a 107% difference. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 6200A) vs 350W (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 55.

Feature	GeForce 6200A	GeForce2 MX 100/200
TDP	33W	10W-70%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	Legacy	PCIe-powered
Length	168mm	165mm
Height	100mm	64mm
Slots	1	1
Temp (Load)	65°C	55-15%
Perf/Watt	0.1	0.3+200%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce 6200A launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $0, while the GeForce2 MX 100/200 launched at $0 and now averages $49. The GeForce 6200A costs 100+% less ($49 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): Infinity (GeForce 6200A) vs 0.1 (GeForce2 MX 100/200) — the GeForce 6200A offers Infinity% better value. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).