GeForce2 MX 100/200 vs GeForce 6200A

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

GeForce2 MX 100/200 Benchmark Check

GeForce 6200A Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

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

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.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

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

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

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

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

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

🖥️

Display & API Support

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

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

🎬

Media & Encoding

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

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

🔌

Power & Dimensions

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

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

💰

Value Analysis

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