Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs HD Graphics 4000

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 4000 with Iris Xe Graphics MAX, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 4000
2012
1.18

Iris Xe Graphics MAX outperforms HD Graphics 4000 by a whopping 335% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1070625
Place by popularity45not in top-100
Power efficiency1.8114.13
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT2DG1
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date14 May 2012 (12 years ago)31 October 2020 (4 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 cores128768
Core clock speed650 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistors1,200 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology22 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown25 Watt
Texture fill rate16.0079.20
Floating-point processing power0.256 TFLOPS2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs224
TMUs1648

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 BusPCIe 4.0 x4
Widthno dataIGP

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 SharedLPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared4 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data68.26 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 DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.04.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.2

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 4000 1.18
Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.13
+335%

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 4000 454
Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971
+334%

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:

900p12
−317%
50−55
+317%
Full HD11
−309%
45−50
+309%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Dota 2 6
−300%
24−27
+300%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Fortnite 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
World of Tanks 21
−329%
90−95
+329%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
−300%
40−45
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
−275%
30−33
+275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−289%
35−40
+289%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Valorant 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−306%
65−70
+306%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−333%
65−70
+333%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−333%
65−70
+333%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 16−18
−306%
65−70
+306%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Valorant 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

This is how HD Graphics 4000 and Iris Xe Graphics MAX compete in popular games:

  • Iris Xe Graphics MAX is 317% faster in 900p
  • Iris Xe Graphics MAX is 309% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 5.13
Recency 14 May 2012 31 October 2020
Chip lithography 22 nm 10 nm

Iris Xe Graphics MAX has a 334.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 120% more advanced lithography process.

The Iris Xe Graphics MAX is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 4000 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 4000 is a notebook card while Iris Xe Graphics MAX 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 4000
HD Graphics 4000
Intel Iris Xe Graphics MAX
Iris Xe Graphics MAX

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 5363 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 219 votes

Rate Iris Xe Graphics MAX 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.