HD Graphics 2000 vs GeForce GTX 480M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 480M and HD Graphics 2000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 480M
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
3.62
+654%

GTX 480M outperforms HD Graphics 2000 by a whopping 654% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7001234
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.87no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameGF100Sandy Bridge GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date25 May 2010 (14 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 cores35248
Core clock speed425 MHz850 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate18.708.100
Floating-point processing power0.5984 TFLOPS0.1296 TFLOPS
ROPs321
TMUs446

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 1.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1200 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth76.8 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 outputs
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/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.

GTX 480M 3.62
+654%
HD Graphics 2000 0.48

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.

GTX 480M 1617
+659%
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.

GTX 480M 8872
+891%
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:

900p33
+725%
4−5
−725%
Full HD41
+273%
11
−273%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
Valorant 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+312%
16−18
−312%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Dota 2 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Metro Exodus 7−8 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Valorant 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Dota 2 35−40
+218%
10−12
−218%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+129%
7−8
−129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Valorant 50−55
+92.9%
27−30
−92.9%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+520%
5−6
−520%
Valorant 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Valorant 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how GTX 480M and HD Graphics 2000 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 480M is 725% faster in 900p
  • GTX 480M is 273% 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 GTX 480M is 2900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 480M surpassed HD Graphics 2000 in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.62 0.48
Recency 25 May 2010 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 40 nm 32 nm

GTX 480M has a 654.2% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 480M 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 GTX 480M
GeForce GTX 480M
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.


2.5 2 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 480M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 1373 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 GTX 480M or HD Graphics 2000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.