
RADEON 9550 vs GeForce 6200

RADEON 9550
Popular choices:

GeForce 6200
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 RADEON 9550 is positioned at rank 363 and the GeForce 6200 is on rank 734, so the RADEON 9550 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9550
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 6200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 6200 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce 6200 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The RADEON 9550 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 6200 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9550.
| Insight | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 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 |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 6200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $30 for the RADEON 9550, it costs 67% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 217.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+217.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 9550 and GeForce 6200

RADEON 9550
The RADEON 9550 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1100 MHz to 1183 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 35 points. Launch price was $79.

GeForce 6200
The GeForce 6200 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: 37 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON 9550 scores 35 versus the GeForce 6200's 37 — the GeForce 6200 leads by 5.7%. The RADEON 9550 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce 6200 uses Pascal, both on a 14 nm process. Shader units: 512 (RADEON 9550) vs 384 (GeForce 6200). Raw compute: 1.211 TFLOPS (RADEON 9550) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 6200). Boost clocks: 1183 MHz vs 1038 MHz.
| Feature | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 35 | 37+6% |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 512+33% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.211 TFLOPS+52% | 0.7972 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1183 MHz+14% | 1038 MHz |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32+33% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 144 KB+13% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 256 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (RADEON 9550) vs 512 KB (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce 6200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON 9550 draws 50W versus the GeForce 6200's 10W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce 6200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON 9550) vs 350W (GeForce 6200). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 10W-80% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 100mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 65°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.7 | 3.7+429% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON 9550 launched at $129 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce 6200 launched at $129 and now averages $10. The GeForce 6200 costs 66.7% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.2 (RADEON 9550) vs 3.7 (GeForce 6200) — the GeForce 6200 offers 208.3% better value. The GeForce 6200 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2017).
| Feature | RADEON 9550 | GeForce 6200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | $129 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $10-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.2 | 3.7+208% |
| Codename | Lexa | GP108B |
| Release | April 20 2017 | February 20 2019 |
| Ranking | #668 | #643 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















