HD Graphics 2000 vs GeForce 830M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 830M and HD Graphics 2000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 830M
2014
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.42
+375%

830M outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 375% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8611266
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.59no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameGM108Sandy Bridge GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date12 March 2014 (11 years ago)1 February 2011 (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 cores25648
Core clock speed1082 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate18.408.100
Floating-point processing power0.5888 TFLOPS0.1296 TFLOPS
ROPs81
TMUs166

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 supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

GeForce 830M 2.42
+375%
HD Graphics 2000 0.51

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.

GeForce 830M 1016
+377%
HD Graphics 2000 213

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.

GeForce 830M 6163
+588%
HD Graphics 2000 896

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 HD16
+45.5%
11
−45.5%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
God of War 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Fortnite 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
God of War 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+182%
16−18
−182%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 24−27
+127%
10−12
−127%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Fortnite 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
God of War 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
+450%
2−3
−450%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+40%
5−6
−40%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 24−27
+127%
10−12
−127%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+225%
4−5
−225%
God of War 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+20%
5−6
−20%
Valorant 40−45
+55.6%
27−30
−55.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Valorant 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
God of War 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Valorant 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
God of War 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how GeForce 830M and HD Graphics 2000 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 830M is 45% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GeForce 830M is 800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GeForce 830M surpassed HD Graphics 2000 in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.42 0.51
Recency 12 March 2014 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

GeForce 830M has a 374.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 830M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2000 in performance tests.

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 830M
GeForce 830M
Intel HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000

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.


3.6 115 votes

Rate GeForce 830M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1429 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 830M or HD Graphics 2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.