Radeon PRO W6300 vs HD Graphics 520

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 520 with Radeon PRO W6300, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 520
2015
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
2.15

PRO W6300 outperforms HD Graphics 520 by a whopping 561% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking866369
Place by popularity36not in top-100
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2023)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2Navi 24
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 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 cores192768
Core clock speed300 MHz1512 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz2040 MHz
Number of transistors189 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate21.6097.92
Floating-point processing power0.3456 TFLOPS3.133 TFLOPS
ROPs332
TMUs2448
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount32 GB2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared32 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data64 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 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.

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL3.02.2
Vulkan+1.3

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
PRO W6300 14.21
+561%

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
PRO W6300 5482
+560%

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:

900p20
−550%
130−140
+550%
Full HD11
−536%
70−75
+536%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Far Cry 5 5
−500%
30−33
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−539%
230−240
+539%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Battlefield 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
−554%
85−90
+554%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−539%
230−240
+539%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
−511%
110−120
+511%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
−550%
65−70
+550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−554%
85−90
+554%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−539%
230−240
+539%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Hitman 3 7−8
−543%
45−50
+543%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
−483%
35−40
+483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
−525%
75−80
+525%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

This is how HD Graphics 520 and PRO W6300 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W6300 is 550% faster in 900p
  • PRO W6300 is 536% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.15 14.21
Recency 1 September 2015 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

HD Graphics 520 has a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

PRO W6300, on the other hand, has a 560.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 520 is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W6300 is a workstation 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 520
HD Graphics 520
AMD Radeon PRO W6300
Radeon PRO W6300

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 2911 votes

Rate HD Graphics 520 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon PRO W6300 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.