Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics vs HD Graphics 400

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1073not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.02no data
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010)
GPU code nameBraswell GT1GMA HD
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)10 January 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 cores9612
Core clock speed320 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate7.200no data
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPSno data
ROPs2no data
TMUs12no 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).

InterfaceRing Busno data

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 typeDDR3Lno data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
Shared memoryno 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 Dependentno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)10
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.3no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2015 10 January 2010
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 35 Watt

HD Graphics 400 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 400 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics. We've got no test results to judge.


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
HD Graphics 400
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics

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.


2.5 404 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 137 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics 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.