GeForce FX 5900 vs GeForce 6200
GeForce FX 5900
Popular choices:
GeForce 6200
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 FX 5900 is positioned at rank 377 and the GeForce 6200 is on rank 734, so the GeForce FX 5900 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce FX 5900
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 6200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 6200 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2011). 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 FX 5900 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 FX 5900.
| Insight | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 6200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $20 for the GeForce FX 5900, it costs 50% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 111.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+111.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 FX 5900 and GeForce 6200
GeForce FX 5900
The GeForce FX 5900 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 24 2011. It features the Rankine architecture. The core clock speed is 607 MHz. It has 1024 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 365W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $699.
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.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce FX 5900 scores 35 versus the GeForce 6200's 37 — the GeForce 6200 leads by 5.7%. The GeForce FX 5900 is built on Rankine while the GeForce 6200 uses Pascal, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 384 (GeForce 6200). Raw compute: 1.244 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 6200).
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 35 | 37+6% |
| Architecture | Rankine | Pascal |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024 ×2+167% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.244 TFLOPS ×2+56% | 0.7972 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48 ×2+200% | 16 |
| TMUs | 64 ×2+167% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB+614% | 0.14 MB |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 FX 5900 comes with 128 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 6200 has 256 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: 768 KB (GeForce FX 5900) vs 512 KB (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce FX 5900 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.125 GB | 0.25 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 768 KB+50% | 512 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0a (GeForce FX 5900) vs 9.0c (GeForce 6200). OpenGL: 1.5 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0a | 9.0c |
| OpenGL | 1.5 | 2.1+40% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce FX 5900 draws 365W versus the GeForce 6200's 10W — a 189.3% difference. The GeForce 6200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce FX 5900) vs 350W (GeForce 6200). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 218mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 365W | 10W-97% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | 218mm | 168mm |
| Height | — | 100mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 3.7+3600% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce FX 5900 launched at $399 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce 6200 launched at $129 and now averages $10. The GeForce 6200 costs 50% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.8 (GeForce FX 5900) vs 3.7 (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce 6200 offers 105.6% better value. The GeForce 6200 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2011).
| Feature | GeForce FX 5900 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399 | $129-68% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $10-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.8 | 3.7+106% |
| Codename | GF110 | GP108B |
| Release | March 24 2011 | February 20 2019 |
| Ranking | #555 | #643 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce FX 5900 and GeForce 6200
