RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs HD Graphics 520

Place in the ranking	857	72
Place by popularity	43	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	81.21
Power efficiency	9.93	45.37
Architecture	Generation 9.0 (2015−2016)	Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code name	Skylake GT2	AD107
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	1 September 2015 (9 years ago)	12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	192	2816
Core clock speed	300 MHz	1620 MHz
Boost clock speed	900 MHz	2130 MHz
Number of transistors	189 million	18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm+	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	70 Watt
Texture fill rate	21.60	187.4
Floating-point processing power	0.3456 TFLOPS	12 TFLOPS
ROPs	3	48
TMUs	24	88
Tensor Cores	no data	88
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	22

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).

Interface	Ring Bus	PCIe 4.0 x8
Length	no data	168 mm
Width	IGP	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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/DDR4	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	16 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	256.0 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

4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

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.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.4	6.8
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	3.0
Vulkan	+	1.3
CUDA	-	8.9

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 520 2.15

RTX 2000 Ada Generation 45.86
+2033%

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 520 831

RTX 2000 Ada Generation 17697
+2030%

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:

900p	20 −1900%	400−450 +1900%
Full HD	10 −2000%	210−220 +2000%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

3.09

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
−1900%

100−105

+1900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Battlefield 5	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Far Cry 5	5 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2011%	190−200 +2011%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −1844%	350−400 +1844%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −2000%	210−220 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −1983%	750−800 +1983%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Battlefield 5	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −2025%	85−90 +2025%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2011%	190−200 +2011%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −1844%	350−400 +1844%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −2000%	210−220 +2000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 −1977%	270−280 +1977%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −1983%	750−800 +1983%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 −1900%	100−105 +1900%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −2025%	85−90 +2025%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −2011%	190−200 +2011%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −1844%	350−400 +1844%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 −2000%	210−220 +2000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −1977%	270−280 +1977%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 −1983%	750−800 +1983%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
−1900%

100−105

+1900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −1900%	60−65 +1900%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −1900%	60−65 +1900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
Hitman 3	7−8 −1900%	140−150 +1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 −1900%	120−130 +1900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 −1983%	250−260 +1983%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
−1900%

100−105

+1900%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 −1900%	40−45 +1900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −2000%	21−24 +2000%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1900%

60−65
+1900%

This is how HD Graphics 520 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation compete in popular games:

RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 1900% faster in 900p
RTX 2000 Ada Generation is 2000% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.15	45.86
Recency	1 September 2015	12 February 2024
Maximum RAM amount	32 GB	16 GB
Chip lithography	14 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	70 Watt

HD Graphics 520 has a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 366.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has a 2033% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX 2000 Ada Generation is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 520 is a desktop card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.