HD Graphics 405 vs GeForce GTX 570
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 570 with HD Graphics 405, including specs and performance data.
GTX 570 outperforms HD Graphics 405 by a whopping 1263% 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 | 497 | 1227 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.87 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.29 | 8.82 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) |
| GPU code name | GF110 | Braswell GT1 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 December 2010 (15 years ago) | 1 April 2015 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $349 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 480 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 732 MHz | 200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 3,000 million | 189 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 219 Watt | 6 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 97 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 43.92 | 9.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.405 TFLOPS | 0.1536 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40 | 2 |
| TMUs | 60 | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 640 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 | PCI-E 2.0 x 16 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | Ring Bus |
| Length | 267 mm | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2x 6-pin | no 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 type | GDDR5 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1280 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 320 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1900 MHz (3800 data rate) | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 152.0 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 | Mini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI | Portable Device Dependent |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (11_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | + |
| 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.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
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.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
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 | 80
+433%
| 15
−433%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 4.36 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1300%
|
3−4
−1300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+1350%
|
2−3
−1350%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+217%
|
27−30
−217%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1300%
|
3−4
−1300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+1600%
|
3−4
−1600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 140−150
+620%
|
20−22
−620%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 27−30
+1350%
|
2−3
−1350%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+317%
|
6−7
−317%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+217%
|
27−30
−217%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 40−45
+1300%
|
3−4
−1300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+325%
|
8−9
−325%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24−27
+317%
|
6−7
−317%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+217%
|
27−30
−217%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 55−60
+1325%
|
4−5
−1325%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+500%
|
3−4
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 70−75
+2333%
|
3−4
−2333%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 45−50
+600%
|
7−8
−600%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1400%
|
7−8
−1400%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 18−20
+800%
|
2−3
−800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12−14
+550%
|
2−3
−550%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 20−22
+1900%
|
1−2
−1900%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+42.9%
|
14−16
−42.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 50−55
+1150%
|
4−5
−1150%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 35−40
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
This is how GTX 570 and HD Graphics 405 compete in popular games:
- GTX 570 is 433% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Escape from Tarkov, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 570 is 3800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 570 surpassed HD Graphics 405 in all 33 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.27 | 0.68 |
| Recency | 7 December 2010 | 1 April 2015 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 219 Watt | 6 Watt |
GTX 570 has a 1263.2% higher aggregate performance score.
HD Graphics 405, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 3550% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 570 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 405 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 570 is a desktop graphics card while HD Graphics 405 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.
