RADEON 9200 SE vs GeForce RTX 2060
RADEON 9200 SE
Popular choices:
GeForce RTX 2060
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. The RADEON 9200 SE is positioned at rank #742 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9200 SE
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON 9200 SE is significantly newer (2025 vs 2019). The RADEON 9200 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce RTX 2060 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce RTX 2060 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 470366.7% higher G3D Mark score and 2300% more VRAM (6 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9200 SE.
| Insight | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-470366.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+470366.7%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm) | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 2 Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (6 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce RTX 2060 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $120 (vs $15), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 58708.3% better value per dollar than the RADEON 9200 SE.
| Insight | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+58708.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($15) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) |
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 RADEON 9200 SE and GeForce RTX 2060
RADEON 9200 SE
The RADEON 9200 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
GeForce RTX 2060
The GeForce RTX 2060 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 7 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1365 MHz to 1680 MHz. It has 1920 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 160W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. It features 30 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 14,114 points. Launch price was $349.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON 9200 SE scores 3 versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 14,114 — the GeForce RTX 2060 leads by 470366.7%. The RADEON 9200 SE is built on RDNA 3.5 while the GeForce RTX 2060 uses Turing, both on 4 nm vs 12 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 1,920 (GeForce RTX 2060). Raw compute: 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 6.451 TFLOPS (GeForce RTX 2060). Boost clocks: 2900 MHz vs 1680 MHz. Ray tracing: 40 RT cores (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 30 (GeForce RTX 2060) vs 240.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3 | 14,114+470367% |
| Architecture | RDNA 3.5 | Turing |
| Process Node | 4 nm | 12 nm |
| Shading Units | 2560+33% | 1920 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 14.85 TFLOPS+130% | 6.451 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz+73% | 1680 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+33% | 48 |
| TMUs | 160+33% | 120 |
| L2 Cache | 8 MB+167% | 3 MB |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 40+33% | 30 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | DLSS 2.0 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 / AFMF (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RADEON 9200 SE comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce RTX 2060 has 6 GB. The GeForce RTX 2060 offers 2300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 8 MB (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 3 MB (GeForce RTX 2060) — the RADEON 9200 SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 6 GB+2300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 192-bit+200% |
| L2 Cache | 8 MB+167% | 3 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 8.1 (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 12 Ultimate (12_2) (GeForce RTX 2060). Vulkan: N/A vs 1.3. OpenGL: 1.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 8.1 | 12 Ultimate (12_2)+48% |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| OpenGL | 1.3 | 4.6+254% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (RADEON 9200 SE) vs NVENC (Turing) (GeForce RTX 2060). Decoder: None vs NVDEC (Turing). Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (RADEON 9200 SE) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce RTX 2060).
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | NVENC (Turing) |
| Decoder | None | NVDEC (Turing) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | H.264,H.265,VP9,VP8,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON 9200 SE draws 55W versus the GeForce RTX 2060's 160W — a 97.7% difference. The RADEON 9200 SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 500W (GeForce RTX 2060). Power connectors: Legacy vs 8-pin. Card length: 168mm vs 229mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 60 vs 72.
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W-66% | 160W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-30% | 500W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | 8-pin |
| Length | 168mm | 229mm |
| Height | 111mm | 113mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 60-17% | 72 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 88.2+88100% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON 9200 SE launched at $30 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce RTX 2060 launched at $349 and now averages $120. The RADEON 9200 SE costs 87.5% less ($105 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.2 (RADEON 9200 SE) vs 117.6 (GeForce RTX 2060) — the GeForce RTX 2060 offers 58700% better value. The RADEON 9200 SE is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2019).
| Feature | RADEON 9200 SE | GeForce RTX 2060 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $30-91% | $349 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15-88% | $120 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.2 | 117.6+58700% |
| Codename | Strix Halo | TU106 |
| Release | January 6 2025 | January 7 2019 |
| Ranking | #98 | #168 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON 9200 SE and GeForce RTX 2060
