HD Graphics 510 vs GeForce 9700M GTS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 9700M GTS and HD Graphics 510, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD Graphics 510 outperforms 9700M GTS by a whopping 101% 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 | 1221 | 1028 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.95 | 7.65 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) |
| GPU code name | G94 | Skylake GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 29 July 2008 (17 years ago) | 1 September 2015 (10 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 cores | 48 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | 530 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 505 million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 14 nm+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 12.72 | 10.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1272 TFLOPS | 0.1728 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 180 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 3 |
| TMUs | 24 | 12 |
| L2 Cache | 64 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |
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 | GDDR3 | LPDDR3/DDR4 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 32 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 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 | No outputs | Portable Device Dependent |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| 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.
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.
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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−57.1%
|
30−35
+57.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−38.5%
|
18−20
+38.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−20.7%
|
35−40
+20.7%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
−150%
|
10−11
+150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−87.5%
|
14−16
+87.5%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 2−3 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−75%
|
7−8
+75%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Valorant | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 510 is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD Graphics 510 performs better in 29 tests (64%)
- there's a draw in 16 tests (36%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.74 | 1.49 |
| Recency | 29 July 2008 | 1 September 2015 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 32 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | 15 Watt |
HD Graphics 510 has a 101% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.
The HD Graphics 510 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9700M GTS 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.
