Arc A750 vs HD Graphics

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics and Arc A750, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics
2012
35 Watt
0.72

A750 outperforms HD Graphics by a whopping 4100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1245215
Place by popularity85not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data49.43
Power efficiency1.6010.47
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1DG2-512
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 April 2012 (14 years ago)12 October 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$289

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores483584
Core clock speed650 MHz2050 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz2400 MHz
Number of transistors392 million21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate6.300537.6
Floating-point processing power0.1008 TFLOPS17.2 TFLOPS
ROPs1112
TMUs6224
Tensor Coresno data448
Ray Tracing Coresno data28
L2 Cacheno data16 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.6
OpenGL4.04.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.801.3
DLSS-+

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.

HD Graphics 0.72
Arc A750 30.24
+4100%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD Graphics 302
Samples: 853
Arc A750 12652
+4089%
Samples: 1890

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD Graphics 300
Arc A750 29667
+9789%

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:

Full HD2−3
−98.1%
107
1440p1−260
+5900%
4K0−136

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.70
1440pno data4.82
4Kno data8.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 164 164
Counter-Strike 2 336 336
Cyberpunk 2077 75 75

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 123 123
Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 270 270
Cyberpunk 2077 66 66
Far Cry 5 111 111
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 112 112
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 89 89
Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Counter-Strike 2 144 144
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280 270−280
Cyberpunk 2077 58 58
Far Cry 5 102 102
Far Cry 6 107 107
Fortnite 140−150 140−150
Forza Horizon 4 106 106
Grand Theft Auto V 99 99
Metro Exodus 105 105
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 185 185
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 110−120 110−120
Cyberpunk 2077 55 55
Far Cry 5 98 98
Forza Horizon 4 90 90
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130 120−130
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69 69
Valorant 190−200 190−200

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 140−150 140−150

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 89 89
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 210−220 210−220
Far Cry 6 71 71
Grand Theft Auto V 41 41
Metro Exodus 65 65
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180 170−180
Valorant 220−230 220−230

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 80−85 80−85
Cyberpunk 2077 42 42
Far Cry 5 76 76
Forza Horizon 4 79 79
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 57 57

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 75−80 75−80

4K
High

Atomic Heart 24−27 24−27
Counter-Strike 2 20 20
Far Cry 6 42 42
Grand Theft Auto V 45 45
Metro Exodus 43 43
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 69 69
Valorant 180−190 180−190

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 45−50 45−50
Counter-Strike 2 30−35 30−35
Cyberpunk 2077 23 23
Far Cry 5 45 45
Forza Horizon 4 61 61
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40 35−40

4K
Epic

Fortnite 35−40 35−40

This is how HD Graphics and Arc A750 compete in popular games:

  • Arc A750 is 5250% faster in 1080p
  • Arc A750 is 5900% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 30.24
Recency 1 April 2012 12 October 2022
Chip lithography 22 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 225 Watt

HD Graphics has 84% lower power consumption.

Arc A750, on the other hand, has a 4100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 73% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A750 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.2 3375 votes

Rate HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 1080 votes

Rate Arc A750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics or Arc A750, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.