ATI Radeon X1650 PRO vs HD Graphics 4000

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1062not rated
Place by popularity42not in top-100
Power efficiency1.83no data
ArchitectureGeneration 7.0 (2012−2013)Ultra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)
GPU code nameIvy Bridge GT2RV530
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date14 May 2012 (12 years ago)1 February 2007 (17 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 cores128no data
Core clock speed650 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,200 million157 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown44 Watt
Texture fill rate16.002.400
Floating-point processing power0.256 TFLOPSno data
ROPs24
TMUs164

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 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared700 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data22.4 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

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)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.03.0
OpenGL4.02.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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
+440%
ATI X1650 PRO 84

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 May 2012 1 February 2007
Chip lithography 22 nm 90 nm

HD Graphics 4000 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 309.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 4000 and Radeon X1650 PRO. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that HD Graphics 4000 is a notebook card while Radeon X1650 PRO 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
ATI Radeon X1650 PRO
Radeon X1650 PRO

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.


3.1 5204 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 69 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 PRO 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.