GeForce Go 7600 vs GeForce 9200M GS

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 Go 7600 is positioned at rank 76 and the GeForce 9200M GS is on rank 683, so the GeForce Go 7600 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

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

Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7600

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

283%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

272%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

269%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

269%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

268%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

267%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

263%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

262%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

260%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

259%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

256%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

255%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

251%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

251%

#61

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

313%

#75

GeForce RTX 3090

MSRP: $1499|Avg: $900

99%

#76

GeForce Go 7600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#76

Radeon Ryzen 7 6800H

MSRP: $200|Avg: $200

95%

#77

GeForce RTX 4090

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $1649

90%

#78

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $1100

82%

#83

Radeon R9 A375

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

82%

#85

Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

80%

#86

Radeon R5 A6-7480

MSRP: $35|Avg: $30

78%

#87

GeForce GT 710

MSRP: $35|Avg: $50

69%

#89

GeForce GT 740

MSRP: $89|Avg: $89

63%

#90

Radeon R7 A8-7680

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

62%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9200M GS

#673

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

8416%

#675

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

7629%

#676

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

7609%

#680

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

6919%

#681

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

6872%

#683

GeForce 9200M GS

MSRP: $100|Avg: $40

100%

#684

Mobility Radeon HD 3410

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

100%

#685

MOBILITY RADEON X700 XL

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

95%

#686

GeForce 9300M GS

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

91%

#687

Mobility Radeon HD 2400

MSRP: $79|Avg: $1

88%

#688

GeForce 6150 LE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $10

85%

#689

Mobility Radeon HD 3870 X2

MSRP: $449|Avg: $50

82%

#690

GeForce 9450

MSRP: $100|Avg: $25

81%

#691

GeForce 9800 GX2

MSRP: $599|Avg: $75

79%

#692

GeForce 7900 GS

MSRP: $259|Avg: $50

78%

#693

MOBILITY RADEON X600

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

78%

#694

Mobility Radeon HD 4250

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

76%

#695

Mobility Radeon X2300 HD

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

76%

#696

Mobility Radeon X2300

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

76%

#697

Mobility Radeon HD 2600 XT

MSRP: $199|Avg: $12

74%

#698

GeForce 8800 GTX

MSRP: $599|Avg: $50

72%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 9200M GS is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce Go 7600 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.8%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.8%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 9200M GS 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 Go 7600 Benchmark Check

GeForce 9200M GS Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce Go 7600 and GeForce 9200M GS

GeForce Go 7600

The GeForce Go 7600 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 25 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 170W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 128 points. Launch price was $249.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce Go 7600 scores 128 and the GeForce 9200M GS reaches 129 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce Go 7600 is built on Kepler while the GeForce 9200M GS uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,152 (GeForce Go 7600) vs 256 (GeForce 9200M GS). Raw compute: 2.378 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7600) vs 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce 9200M GS). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 993 MHz.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
G3D Mark Score	128	129
Architecture	Kepler	Maxwell
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	1152+350%	256
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.378 TFLOPS+368%	0.5084 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1033 MHz+4%	993 MHz
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	96+300%	24
L1 Cache	96 KB	128 KB+33%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
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 Go 7600 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 9200M GS has 256 MB. The GeForce Go 7600 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce Go 7600) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9200M GS) — the GeForce 9200M GS has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB+100%	0.25 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce Go 7600) vs 10.0 (GeForce 9200M GS). Vulkan: None vs None. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.

Feature	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
DirectX	9.0c	10.0+11%
Vulkan	None	None
OpenGL	2.1	3.3+57%
Max Displays	2+100%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce Go 7600) vs No (GeForce 9200M GS). Decoder: PureVideo vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 (GeForce Go 7600) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce 9200M GS).

Feature	GeForce Go 7600	GeForce 9200M GS
Encoder	No	No
Decoder	PureVideo	PureVideo HD VP3
Codecs	MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce Go 7600 draws 170W versus the GeForce 9200M GS's 16W — a 165.6% difference. The GeForce 9200M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce Go 7600) vs 350W (GeForce 9200M GS). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 75°C.