Radeon HD 6540G2 vs HD Graphics 4600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 4600 and Radeon HD 6540G2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD Graphics 4600
2013
45 Watt
1.70
+44.1%

HD Graphics 4600 outperforms HD 6540G2 by a considerable 44% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9871105
Place by popularity82not in top-100
Power efficiency6.54no data
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)Terascale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameHaswell GT2no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 May 2013 (12 years ago)14 June 2011 (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 cores160480
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology22 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Wattno data
Texture fill rate22.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.352 TFLOPSno data
ROPs2no data
TMUs20no 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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
Shared memory+-

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.3no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

HD Graphics 4600 1.70
+44.1%
HD 6540G2 1.18

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 4600 911
HD 6540G2 987
+8.4%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

HD Graphics 4600 5203
+57.9%
HD 6540G2 3295

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:

900p14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Full HD11
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Fortnite 12
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Valorant 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27
−3.7%
27−30
+3.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Dota 2 22
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Fortnite 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 4
+100%
2−3
−100%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−75%
7−8
+75%
Valorant 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Dota 2 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+12.1%
30−35
−12.1%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+41.7%
12−14
−41.7%
Valorant 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how HD Graphics 4600 and HD 6540G2 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 4600 is 56% faster in 900p
  • HD Graphics 4600 is 57% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD Graphics 4600 is 400% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6540G2 is 75% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 4600 performs better in 39 tests (81%)
  • HD 6540G2 performs better in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (15%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.70 1.18
Recency 27 May 2013 14 June 2011
Chip lithography 22 nm 40 nm

HD Graphics 4600 has a 44.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 81.8% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 4600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6540G2 in performance tests.

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 4600
HD Graphics 4600
AMD Radeon HD 6540G2
Radeon HD 6540G2

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 3040 votes

Rate HD Graphics 4600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6540G2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 4600 or Radeon HD 6540G2, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.