Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs GeForce 820A

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking988not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.65no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameGF117GMA HD
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date17 March 2014 (10 years ago)10 January 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores9612
Core clock speed775 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors585 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate12.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.2976 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no 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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no 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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 March 2014 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

GeForce 820A has an age advantage of 4 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 820A and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 820A
GeForce 820A
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.8 42 votes

Rate GeForce 820A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 137 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.