GeForce3 Ti 200 vs GeForce 256

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 GeForce3 Ti 200 is positioned at rank 382 and the GeForce 256 is on rank 750, so the GeForce3 Ti 200 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 GeForce3 Ti 200

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

241800%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

232300%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

229600%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

229200%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

228733%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

227433%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

224567%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

223733%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

221667%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

221067%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

218400%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

217933%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

214000%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

213867%

#367

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

266667%

#382

GeForce3 Ti 200

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

100%

#383

GeForce4 Ti 4200

MSRP: $199|Avg: $5

100%

#384

GeForce4 Ti 4400

MSRP: $299|Avg: $49

67%

#385

GeForce4 MX 460

MSRP: $179|Avg: $15

67%

#386

GeForce4 Ti 4800 SE

MSRP: $299|Avg: $30

67%

#387

GeForce4 Ti 4800

MSRP: $399|Avg: $40

67%

#388

GeForce4 Ti 4600

MSRP: $399|Avg: $40

67%

#389

RADEON 7500

MSRP: $199|Avg: $50

67%

#390

GeForce3 Ti 500

MSRP: $349|Avg: $49

33%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 256

#737

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

361900%

#739

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

328067%

#740

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

327200%

#744

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

297533%

#745

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

295500%

#747

GeForce2 MX/MX 400

MSRP: $129|Avg: $15

100%

#748

GeForce4 MX 440

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

100%

#749

RADEON 7200

MSRP: $99|Avg: $45

100%

#750

GeForce 256

MSRP: $199|Avg: $20

100%

#751

GeForce2 MX

MSRP: $129|Avg: $49

67%

#752

GeForce4 440

MSRP: $469|Avg: $49

33%

#753

GeForce3

MSRP: $499|Avg: $49

33%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 256 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce3 Ti 200.

Insight	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-25%)	✅Leading raw performance (+25%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022))	Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm)
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	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce 256 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $20 versus $49 for the GeForce3 Ti 200, it costs 59% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 206.3% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+206.3%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49)	✅More affordable ($20)

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.

GeForce3 Ti 200 Benchmark Check

GeForce 256 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce3 Ti 200 and GeForce 256

GeForce3 Ti 200

The GeForce3 Ti 200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in September 20 2018. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1515 MHz to 1710 MHz. It has 2944 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 215W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 46 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points. Launch price was $699.

GeForce 256

The GeForce 256 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: 5 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce3 Ti 200 scores 4 versus the GeForce 256's 5 — the GeForce 256 leads by 25%. The GeForce3 Ti 200 is built on Turing while the GeForce 256 uses Pascal, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,944 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 384 (GeForce 256). Raw compute: 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 256). Boost clocks: 1710 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
G3D Mark Score	4	5+25%
Architecture	Turing	Pascal
Process Node	12 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	2944+667%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	10.07 TFLOPS+1163%	0.7972 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1710 MHz+65%	1038 MHz
ROPs	64+300%	16
TMUs	184+667%	24
L1 Cache	2.9 MB+1971%	0.14 MB
L2 Cache	4 MB+700%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
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. L2 Cache: 4 MB (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 256) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	4 MB+700%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 8.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 7.0 (GeForce 256). OpenGL: 1.3 vs 1.2. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
DirectX	8.1+16%	7.0
OpenGL	1.3+8%	1.2
Max Displays	2+100%	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs None (GeForce 256). Decoder: None vs MPEG-2 Motion Comp. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce 256).

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
Encoder	None	None
Decoder	None	MPEG-2 Motion Comp
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce3 Ti 200 draws 215W versus the GeForce 256's 10W — a 182.2% difference. The GeForce 256 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 350W (GeForce 256). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 183mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 60 vs 60°C.

Feature	GeForce3 Ti 200	GeForce 256
TDP	215W	10W-95%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	183mm	165mm
Height	100mm	100mm
Slots	1	1
Temp (Load)	60	60°C
Perf/Watt	0.0	0.5

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce3 Ti 200 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce 256 launched at $199 and now averages $20. The GeForce 256 costs 59.2% less ($29 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 0.3 (GeForce 256) — the GeForce 256 offers 200% better value. The GeForce 256 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2018).