Radeon R5 230 vs HD Graphics 3000

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 3000 with Radeon R5 230, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 3000
2011
0.66
+15.8%

HD Graphics 3000 outperforms R5 230 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11871209
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.05
ArchitectureGeneration 6.0 (2011)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameSandy Bridge GT2+Caicos
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)3 April 2014 (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 cores96160
Core clock speed650 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1300 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,160 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown19 Watt
Texture fill rate15.605.000
Floating-point processing power0.2496 TFLOPS0.2 TFLOPS
ROPs24
TMUs128

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 supportno dataPCIe 1.0 x4
InterfaceRing BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataN/A

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 SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
Memory bandwidthno data10.67 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
Eyefinity-+
HDMI-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire-+
​PowerPlayno data+
DDMA audiono data-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)DirectX® 11
Shader Model4.15.0
OpenGL3.14.4
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD Graphics 3000 0.66
+15.8%
R5 230 0.57

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.

HD Graphics 3000 254
+14.9%
R5 230 221

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
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+25%
24−27
−25%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+25%
24−27
−25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Hitman 3 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
+25%
24−27
−25%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

This is how HD Graphics 3000 and R5 230 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 3000 is 33% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.66 0.57
Recency 1 February 2011 3 April 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 40 nm

HD Graphics 3000 has a 15.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

R5 230, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years.

The HD Graphics 3000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 230 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 3000 is a notebook card while Radeon R5 230 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000
AMD Radeon R5 230
Radeon R5 230

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.8 2435 votes

Rate HD Graphics 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 240 votes

Rate Radeon R5 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.