Radeon Pro W6400 vs HD Graphics 520
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 520 with Radeon Pro W6400, including specs and performance data.
Pro W6400 outperforms HD Graphics 520 by a whopping 908% 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 | 944 | 312 |
| Place by popularity | 68 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 10.29 | 31.14 |
| Architecture | Generation 9.0 (2015−2016) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Skylake GT2 | Navi 24 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (10 years ago) | 19 January 2022 (4 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 192 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 900 MHz | 2331 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 5,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm+ | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 21.60 | 111.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.3456 TFLOPS | 3.58 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 3 | 32 |
| TMUs | 24 | 48 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 12 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 192 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 1024 KB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 8 MB |
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 x4 |
| Width | no data | 1-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 | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 112.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 2x 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 and SDK support
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 | 6.6 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.3 |
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.
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.
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
−900%
| 200−210
+900%
|
| Full HD | 11
−900%
| 110−120
+900%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Fortnite | 7
−900%
|
70−75
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−797%
|
350−400
+797%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30
−900%
|
300−310
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 26
−900%
|
260−270
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−900%
|
90−95
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−797%
|
350−400
+797%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Dota 2 | 22
−900%
|
220−230
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−900%
|
110−120
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−900%
|
80−85
+900%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−797%
|
350−400
+797%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 9−10
−900%
|
90−95
+900%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−900%
|
140−150
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 20−22
−900%
|
200−210
+900%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
−900%
|
150−160
+900%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−900%
|
50−55
+900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−900%
|
150−160
+900%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
−900%
|
100−105
+900%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−900%
|
40−45
+900%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
This is how HD Graphics 520 and Pro W6400 compete in popular games:
- Pro W6400 is 900% faster in 900p
- Pro W6400 is 900% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.01 | 20.27 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 19 January 2022 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 32 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
HD Graphics 520 has a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 233% lower power consumption.
Pro W6400, on the other hand, has a 908% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro W6400 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 520 in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 520 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6400 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
