GeForce FX 5900 Ultra vs HD Graphics 2500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 2500 and GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 2500
2012
0.65
+550%

HD Graphics 2500 outperforms 5900 Ultra by a whopping 550% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12521523
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.13
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT1NV35
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 April 2012 (14 years ago)23 October 2003 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

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

Pipelines / CUDA cores48no data
Core clock speed650 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown59 Watt
Texture fill rate6.9003.600
Floating-point processing power0.1104 TFLOPSno data
ROPs14
TMUs68

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 1.0 x16AGP 8x
Lengthno data218 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x Molex

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared425 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data27.2 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (11_0)9.0a
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.01.5 (2.1)
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.80N/A

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 HD8
+700%
1−2
−700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data499.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Valorant 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 27−30
+600%
4−5
−600%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+600%
2−3
−600%
Valorant 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 2500 and FX 5900 Ultra compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 2500 is 700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.10
Recency 1 April 2012 23 October 2003
Chip lithography 22 nm 130 nm

HD Graphics 2500 has a 550% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 491% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 2500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5900 Ultra 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 1631 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 7 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 2500 or GeForce FX 5900 Ultra, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.