HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) vs Radeon R7 240
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R7 240 with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), including specs and performance data.
R7 240 outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 548% 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 | 938 | 1393 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.16 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 5.56 | no data |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) |
| GPU code name | Oland | Sandy Bridge |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Design | reference | no data |
| Release date | 8 October 2013 (13 years ago) | 1 May 2011 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $69 | no data |
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 | 320 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 780 MHz | 1100 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 950 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 14.00 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.448 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 20 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
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).
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | N/A | no data |
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 | GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64/128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1150 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 72 GB/s | no data |
| 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 | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| CrossFire | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| DDMA audio | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 10.1 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
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 HD | 45−50 | 7
−84.4%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 1.53 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 5−6 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| Valorant | 27−30 | 27−30 |
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10 | 10 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 6−7 |
| Valorant | 27−30 | 27−30 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 5−6 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 6−7 |
| Valorant | 27−30 | 27−30 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5 | 4−5 |
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 1−2 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Valorant | 5−6 | 5−6 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 1−2 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 1−2 |
This is how R7 240 and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) compete in popular games:
- R7 240 is 543% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 30 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.14 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 8 October 2013 | 1 May 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
R7 240 has a 548% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 13% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon R7 240 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 240 is a desktop graphics card while HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
