
GeForce3 Ti 200 vs GeForce3

GeForce3 Ti 200
Popular choices:

GeForce3
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 GeForce3 Ti 200 is positioned at rank 382 and the GeForce3 is on rank 755, so the GeForce3 Ti 200 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce3 Ti 200
Performance Per Dollar GeForce3
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce3 Ti 200 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce3 Ti 200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce3 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce3 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce3 Ti 200 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-25%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+25%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Turing (2018−2022)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+693.7%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce3 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $49 (vs $49), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 25% better value per dollar than the GeForce3 Ti 200.
| Insight | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+25%) |
| 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 GeForce3 Ti 200 and GeForce3

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.

GeForce3
The GeForce3 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: 5 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce3 Ti 200 scores 4 versus the GeForce3's 5 — the GeForce3 leads by 25%. The GeForce3 Ti 200 is built on Turing while the GeForce3 uses Maxwell, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,944 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 384 (GeForce3). Raw compute: 10.07 TFLOPS (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 0.7227 TFLOPS (GeForce3). Boost clocks: 1710 MHz vs 941 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4 | 5+25% |
| Architecture | Turing | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2944+667% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 10.07 TFLOPS+1293% | 0.7227 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1710 MHz+82% | 941 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+700% | 8 |
| TMUs | 184+667% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 2.9 MB+1426% | 0.19 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GeForce3 Ti 200 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce3 has 65 MB. The GeForce3 Ti 200 offers 693.7% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 1 MB (GeForce3) — the GeForce3 Ti 200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+694% | 0.063 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+300% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 8.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 8.1 (GeForce3). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 1.3 vs 1.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 8.1 | 8.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 1.3 | 1.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs None (GeForce3). Decoder: None vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs MPEG-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce3).
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | None | None |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | MPEG-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce3 Ti 200 draws 215W versus the GeForce3's 33W — a 146.8% difference. The GeForce3 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 350W (GeForce3). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 183mm vs 165mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 60 vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 215W | 33W-85% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 183mm | 165mm |
| Height | 100mm | 100mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 60-29% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.0 | 0.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce3 Ti 200 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce3 launched at $499 and now averages $49. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.1 (GeForce3 Ti 200) vs 0.1 (GeForce3) — the GeForce3 offers 0% better value. The GeForce3 Ti 200 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce3 Ti 200 | GeForce3 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-70% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $49 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.1 | 0.1 |
| Codename | TU104 | GM108 |
| Release | September 20 2018 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #94 | #810 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















