GeForce GT 415M vs HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) and GeForce GT 415M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
2016
0.45

GT 415M outperforms HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) by an impressive 64% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12441163
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data4.25
ArchitectureGen. 8 (2015−2016)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameBraswellGF108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2016 (8 years ago)3 September 2010 (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 cores1248
Core clock speed320 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed640 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data585 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data12 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.000
Floating-point processing powerno data0.096 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.212 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/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. 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 400 (Braswell) 0.45
GT 415M 0.74
+64.4%

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.

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 349
GT 415M 379
+8.6%

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 HD6
−50%
9−10
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
World of Tanks 14−16
−26.7%
18−20
+26.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
World of Tanks 0−1 3−4

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) and GT 415M compete in popular games:

  • GT 415M is 50% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 415M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 415M is ahead in 17 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.45 0.74
Recency 1 April 2016 3 September 2010
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

GT 415M, on the other hand, has a 64.4% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 415M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) in performance tests.


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 400 (Braswell)
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 415M
GeForce GT 415M

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.


2.1 243 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 26 votes

Rate GeForce GT 415M 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.