CPU
GPU
GeForce 9500M GS
Popular choices:
GeForce G200
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 9500M GS is positioned at rank 628 and the GeForce G200 is on rank 357, so the GeForce G200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9500M GS
Performance Per Dollar GeForce G200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce G200 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2008). The GeForce G200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 9500M GS lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce G200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9500M GS.
| Insight | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / G9x (2007−2010)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce G200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce G200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $15), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 2.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+2.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 9500M GS and GeForce G200
GeForce 9500M GS
The GeForce 9500M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 15 2008. It features the G9x architecture. The core clock speed is 500 MHz. It has 224 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 133 points.
GeForce G200
The GeForce G200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 136 points. Launch price was $79.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9500M GS scores 133 and the GeForce G200 reaches 136 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9500M GS is built on G9x while the GeForce G200 uses Pascal, both on 65 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 224 (GeForce 9500M GS) vs 384 (GeForce G200).
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 133 | 136+2% |
| Architecture | G9x | Pascal |
| Process Node | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 224 | 384+71% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 9500M GS) vs 10.1 (GeForce G200). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 9500M GS) vs None (GeForce G200). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 9500M GS) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce G200).
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | PureVideo HD (VP4) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9500M GS draws 150W versus the GeForce G200's 30W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce G200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9500M GS) vs 350W (GeForce G200). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 30W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | 168mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.9 | 4.5+400% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 9500M GS launched at $60 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce G200 launched at $299 and now averages $15. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.9 (GeForce 9500M GS) vs 9.1 (GeForce G200) — the GeForce G200 offers 2.2% better value. The GeForce G200 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce 9500M GS | GeForce G200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60-80% | $299 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.9 | 9.1+2% |
| Codename | NB9E-GTX | GP108 |
| Release | July 15 2008 | May 17 2017 |
| Ranking | #825 | #641 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9500M GS and GeForce G200
