GeForce G210M vs HD Graphics 500
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 500 and GeForce G210M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD Graphics 500 outperforms G210M by a whopping 129% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1196 | 1352 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.97 | 1.68 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Apollo Lake GT1 | GT218 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 15 June 2009 (16 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 cores | 96 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 650 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 260 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 14 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 7.800 | 5.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1248 TFLOPS | 0.048 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | no data | 72 |
| ROPs | 2 | 4 |
| TMUs | 12 | 8 |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | Ring Bus | PCIe 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 type | DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | Up to 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | Up to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 12.8 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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | Dual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGA |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | no data | 8.0 |
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | 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.
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.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
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 HD | 10
−60%
| 16
+60%
|
| 1440p | 1 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+16%
|
24−27
−16%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+50%
|
14
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 6
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+16%
|
24−27
−16%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 5
−100%
|
10−11
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+16%
|
24−27
−16%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics 500 and GeForce G210M compete in popular games:
- GeForce G210M is 60% 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 HD Graphics 500 is 167% faster.
- in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GeForce G210M is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD Graphics 500 is ahead in 16 tests (67%)
- GeForce G210M is ahead in 2 tests (8%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (25%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.71 | 0.31 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 15 June 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 14 Watt |
HD Graphics 500 has a 129% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 40% lower power consumption.
The HD Graphics 500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G210M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
