Radeon E6460 vs HD Graphics 2500
Aggregated performance score
Radeon E6460 outperforms HD Graphics 2500 by 22% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1133 | 1098 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Architecture | Gen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2011−2012) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Ivy Bridge GT1 | Caicos |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 April 2012 (12 years ago) | 7 April 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Current price | $521 | $150 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
HD Graphics 2500 and Radeon E6460 have a nearly equal value for money.
Detailed Specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 6 | 160 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1150 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 392 million | 370 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 22 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | unknown | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 6.900 | 4.800 |
| Floating-point performance | 13.8 gflops | 192 gflops |
Form Factor & Compatibility
Information on HD Graphics 2500 and Radeon E6460 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Memory type | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 3200 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.0 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.80 | N/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 HD | 8
−12.5%
| 9−10
+12.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
This is how HD Graphics 2500 and Radeon E6460 compete in popular games:
- Radeon E6460 is 12.5% faster than HD Graphics 2500 in 1080p
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 0.68 | 0.83 |
| Recency | 1 April 2012 | 7 April 2011 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 40 nm |
The Radeon E6460 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2500 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 2500 is a notebook card while Radeon E6460 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
