GeForce 9200M GS vs GeForce 205
GeForce 9200M GS
Popular choices:
GeForce 205
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 9200M GS is positioned at rank 683 and the GeForce 205 is on rank 614, so the GeForce 205 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9200M GS
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 205
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 205 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce 205 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 9200M GS lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 9200M GS is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.4% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 205 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.4%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 205 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $15 versus $40 for the GeForce 9200M GS, it costs 63% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 160.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+160.5%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($40) | ✅More affordable ($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 9200M GS and GeForce 205
GeForce 9200M GS
The GeForce 9200M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 25 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 965 MHz to 993 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 16W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 129 points.
GeForce 205
The GeForce 205 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: 126 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9200M GS scores 129 and the GeForce 205 reaches 126 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9200M GS is built on Maxwell while the GeForce 205 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 256 (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 384 (GeForce 205). Raw compute: 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 205). Boost clocks: 993 MHz vs 1038 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 129+2% | 126 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 256 | 384+50% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.5084 TFLOPS | 0.7972 TFLOPS+57% |
| Boost Clock | 993 MHz | 1038 MHz+5% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 144 KB+13% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9200M GS comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 205 has 512 MB. The GeForce 205 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 205) — the GeForce 9200M GS has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 10.1 (GeForce 205). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | None | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 1 | 2+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 9200M GS) vs None (GeForce 205). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP3 vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce 9200M GS) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce 205).
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP3 | PureVideo HD (VP4) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9200M GS draws 16W versus the GeForce 205's 10W — a 46.2% difference. The GeForce 205 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 350W (GeForce 205). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 16W | 10W-38% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | 168mm |
| Height | 0mm | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 8.1 | 12.6+56% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 9200M GS launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the GeForce 205 launched at $50 and now averages $15. The GeForce 205 costs 62.5% less ($25 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.2 (GeForce 9200M GS) vs 8.4 (GeForce 205) — the GeForce 205 offers 162.5% better value. The GeForce 205 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2016).
| Feature | GeForce 9200M GS | GeForce 205 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100 | $50-50% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $15-63% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.2 | 8.4+163% |
| Codename | GM108 | GP108B |
| Release | March 25 2016 | February 20 2019 |
| Ranking | #864 | #643 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9200M GS and GeForce 205
