Radeon RX 6500 XT vs HD Graphics 520

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 520 with Radeon RX 6500 XT, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 520
2015
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
2.11

RX 6500 XT outperforms HD Graphics 520 by a whopping 1051% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking875228
Place by popularity6495
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data57.82
Power efficiency9.8915.94
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameSkylake GT2Navi 24
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)19 January 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$199

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1921024
Core clock speed300 MHz2610 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz2815 MHz
Number of transistors189 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm+6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt107 Watt
Texture fill rate21.60180.2
Floating-point processing power0.3456 TFLOPS5.765 TFLOPS
ROPs332
TMUs2464
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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 data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin

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 GB8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2248 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data143.9 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 Dependent1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

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 compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.6
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.

HD Graphics 520 2.11
RX 6500 XT 24.29
+1051%

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
RX 6500 XT 9558
+1050%

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 520 1294
RX 6500 XT 22954
+1675%

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 520 5722
RX 6500 XT 76445
+1236%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD Graphics 520 804
RX 6500 XT 15712
+1855%

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.

HD Graphics 520 6701
RX 6500 XT 91909
+1272%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD Graphics 520 73656
RX 6500 XT 356129
+384%

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
−1050%
230−240
+1050%
Full HD11
−491%
65
+491%
1440p2−3
−1400%
30
+1400%
4K1−2
−1500%
16
+1500%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.06
1440pno data6.63
4Kno data12.44

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
−2120%
111
+2120%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−700%
64
+700%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1340%
72
+1340%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
−1580%
84
+1580%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−1760%
90−95
+1760%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−400%
40
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−980%
54
+980%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−5000%
102
+5000%
Fortnite 7
−1557%
110−120
+1557%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−830%
90−95
+830%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−3200%
66
+3200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−718%
90−95
+718%
Valorant 40−45
−305%
160−170
+305%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
−860%
48
+860%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−1760%
90−95
+1760%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−250%
28
+250%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30
−747%
250−260
+747%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−580%
34
+580%
Dota 2 26
−458%
145
+458%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4500%
92
+4500%
Fortnite 9−10
−1189%
110−120
+1189%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−830%
90−95
+830%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−1650%
35
+1650%
Grand Theft Auto V 3
−2767%
86
+2767%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1633%
52
+1633%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−718%
90−95
+718%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−2200%
92
+2200%
Valorant 40−45
−305%
160−170
+305%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−1760%
90−95
+1760%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−200%
24
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−500%
30
+500%
Dota 2 22
−400%
110
+400%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−4200%
86
+4200%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−830%
90−95
+830%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
−2250%
47
+2250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−718%
90−95
+718%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−671%
54
+671%
Valorant 40−45
−305%
160−170
+305%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
−1189%
110−120
+1189%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1079%
160−170
+1079%
Grand Theft Auto V 0−1 37
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−1067%
170−180
+1067%
Valorant 16−18
−1156%
200−210
+1156%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1800%
57
+1800%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1100%
60−65
+1100%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−2200%
23
+2200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−1200%
35−40
+1200%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−850%
18−20
+850%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−127%
34
+127%
Valorant 10−11
−1250%
130−140
+1250%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 4
Dota 2 4−5
−1575%
67
+1575%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−1050%
23
+1050%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 40−45
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−700%
24−27
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−733%
24−27
+733%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 18
+0%
18
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 11
+0%
11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+0%
28
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3
+0%
3
+0%

This is how HD Graphics 520 and RX 6500 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6500 XT is 1050% faster in 900p
  • RX 6500 XT is 491% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6500 XT is 1400% faster in 1440p
  • RX 6500 XT is 1500% faster in 4K

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

  • in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6500 XT is 5000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6500 XT is ahead in 55 tests (86%)
  • there's a draw in 9 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.11 24.29
Recency 1 September 2015 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 107 Watt

HD Graphics 520 has a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 613.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6500 XT, on the other hand, has a 1051.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6500 XT 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 RX 6500 XT is a desktop one.

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 RX 6500 XT
Radeon RX 6500 XT

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 3237 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 3401 vote

Rate Radeon RX 6500 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 520 or Radeon RX 6500 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.