Radeon RX 7800 XT vs HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) with Radeon RX 7800 XT, including specs and performance data.
RX 7800 XT outperforms HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) by a whopping 18253% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1308 | 33 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 66 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 67.95 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 16.51 |
| Architecture | Gen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) |
| GPU code name | Sandy Bridge | Navi 32 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 May 2011 (13 years ago) | 25 August 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
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 cores | 6 | 3840 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 1295 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1100 MHz | 2430 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 28,100 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 263 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 583.2 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 37.32 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 96 |
| TMUs | no data | 240 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 60 |
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 | no data | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 8-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 type | no data | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 16 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 2438 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 624.1 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 Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1 |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.2 |
| 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.
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.
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.
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 HD | 8
−2588%
| 215
+2588%
|
| 1440p | 0−1 | 122 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 72 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.32 |
| 1440p | no data | 4.09 |
| 4K | no data | 6.93 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−2091%
|
241
+2091%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−8500%
|
258
+8500%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−1718%
|
200
+1718%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−3100%
|
96
+3100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−8033%
|
488
+8033%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−2775%
|
110−120
+2775%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−1382%
|
163
+1382%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2567%
|
80
+2567%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−1514%
|
113
+1514%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−6533%
|
398
+6533%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−2971%
|
210−220
+2971%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−2775%
|
110−120
+2775%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−3380%
|
170−180
+3380%
|
| World of Tanks | 10
−2690%
|
270−280
+2690%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−12
−1255%
|
149
+1255%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−2367%
|
74
+2367%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−1657%
|
120−130
+1657%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−5567%
|
340
+5567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−2971%
|
210−220
+2971%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1567%
|
50−55
+1567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−8000%
|
160−170
+8000%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−1500%
|
48
+1500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−3900%
|
160−170
+3900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−3575%
|
147
+3575%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−5000%
|
250−260
+5000%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−913%
|
152
+913%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−913%
|
152
+913%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−20800%
|
200−210
+20800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−913%
|
152
+913%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 80−85 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−1000%
|
22
+1000%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−18233%
|
2750−2800
+18233%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−14400%
|
140−150
+14400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 171
+0%
|
171
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 178
+0%
|
178
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 240−250
+0%
|
240−250
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 178
+0%
|
178
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 147
+0%
|
147
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Valorant | 290−300
+0%
|
290−300
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 140
+0%
|
140
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 140
+0%
|
140
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 400−450
+0%
|
400−450
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 85−90
+0%
|
85−90
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 243
+0%
|
243
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 148
+0%
|
148
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 63
+0%
|
63
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 50−55
+0%
|
50−55
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21
+0%
|
21
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 130
+0%
|
130
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
This is how HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 7800 XT is 2588% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RX 7800 XT is 20800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 7800 XT is ahead in 31 test (51%)
- there's a draw in 30 tests (49%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.34 | 62.40 |
| Recency | 1 May 2011 | 25 August 2023 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 5 nm |
RX 7800 XT has a 18252.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 540% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) is a notebook card while Radeon RX 7800 XT is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
