Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 vs HD Graphics 5500

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking970not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.19no data
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Gen. 3 (2005)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT2GMA 950
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date5 September 2014 (10 years ago)1 March 2005 (19 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 cores1924
Core clock speed300 MHzno data
Boost clock speed850 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors1,300 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate20.40no data
Floating-point processing power0.3264 TFLOPSno data
ROPs3no data
TMUs24no data

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 Busno data
WidthIGPno data

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 typeSystem Sharedno data
Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
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 data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)no data
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 September 2014 1 March 2005
Chip lithography 14 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 7 Watt

HD Graphics 5500 has an age advantage of 9 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950, on the other hand, has 114.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 5500 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that HD Graphics 5500 is a desktop card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 is a notebook 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 5500
HD Graphics 5500
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

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 1552 votes

Rate HD Graphics 5500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 73 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 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.