GRID K240Q vs HD Graphics 5600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 5600 with GRID K240Q, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 5600
2014
15 Watt
4.41

K240Q outperforms HD Graphics 5600 by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking702628
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.58
Power efficiency22.892.08
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT2GK104
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date5 September 2014 (11 years ago)28 June 2013 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$469

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1921536
Core clock speed300 MHz745 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,300 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt225 Watt
Texture fill rate25.2095.36
Floating-point processing power0.4032 TFLOPS2.289 TFLOPS
ROPs332
TMUs24128
L1 Cacheno data128 KB
L2 Cacheno data512 KB

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 3.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data160.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 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 and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL3.01.2
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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.

HD Graphics 5600 4.41
GRID K240Q 6.00
+36.1%

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 5600 1868
Samples: 25
GRID K240Q 2541
+36%
Samples: 8

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:

Full HD12
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data29.31

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Fortnite 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Valorant 55−60
−29.3%
75−80
+29.3%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
−35%
27−30
+35%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
−26.6%
100−105
+26.6%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Dota 2 35−40
−28.2%
50−55
+28.2%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Fortnite 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 5 12−14
−33.3%
16−18
+33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Metro Exodus 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Valorant 55−60
−29.3%
75−80
+29.3%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Dota 2 35−40
−28.2%
50−55
+28.2%
Escape from Tarkov 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−28.6%
18−20
+28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
−28.6%
27−30
+28.6%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
−33.3%
24−27
+33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Valorant 55−60
−29.3%
75−80
+29.3%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
−29.6%
35−40
+29.6%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
−28.6%
45−50
+28.6%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
−32.4%
45−50
+32.4%
Valorant 45−50
−32.7%
65−70
+32.7%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Escape from Tarkov 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Far Cry 5 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
−33.3%
12−14
+33.3%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
−31.3%
21−24
+31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Valorant 21−24
−30.4%
30−33
+30.4%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
−20%
18−20
+20%
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%

This is how HD Graphics 5600 and GRID K240Q compete in popular games:

  • GRID K240Q is 33% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.41 6.00
Recency 5 September 2014 28 June 2013
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 225 Watt

HD Graphics 5600 has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1400% lower power consumption.

GRID K240Q, on the other hand, has a 36.1% higher aggregate performance score.

The GRID K240Q is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 5600 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 5600 is a notebook graphics card while GRID K240Q is a workstation 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 5600
HD Graphics 5600
NVIDIA GRID K240Q
GRID K240Q

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.


2.7 28 votes

Rate HD Graphics 5600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate GRID K240Q on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 5600 or GRID K240Q, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.