GeForce GT 520M vs HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and GeForce GT 520M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
520M outperforms HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1290 | 1253 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 4.45 |
| Architecture | Gen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2012) | Fermi (2010−2014) |
| GPU code name | Ivy Bridge GT1 | GF108 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 October 2012 (13 years ago) | 5 January 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $59.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 6 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 585 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 12 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 4.800 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.1152 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 64 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 12.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.0 | 12 API |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | - | + |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | 5−6
−40%
| 7
+40%
|
| Full HD | 9
−33.3%
| 12
+33.3%
|
| 1200p | 5−6
−40%
| 7
+40%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 5.00 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−3.3%
|
30−35
+3.3%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 11
−81.8%
|
20−22
+81.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12−14
+9.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−3.3%
|
30−35
+3.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−12
−9.1%
|
12−14
+9.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−3.3%
|
30−35
+3.3%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 0−1 | 1−2 |
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 1−2 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) and GT 520M compete in popular games:
- GT 520M is 40% faster in 900p
- GT 520M is 33% faster in 1080p
- GT 520M is 40% faster in 1200p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 520M is 82% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GT 520M performs better in 10 tests (33%)
- there's a draw in 20 tests (67%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.58 | 0.69 |
| Recency | 1 October 2012 | 5 January 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 40 nm |
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 82% more advanced lithography process.
GT 520M, on the other hand, has a 19% higher aggregate performance score.
The GeForce GT 520M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
