HD Graphics 400 vs Iris Pro Graphics 5200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and HD Graphics 400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200
2013
System shared System shared + 128 MB eDRAM, 45 Watt
3.07
+172%

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 172% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7721082
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.0512.98
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameHaswell GT3eBraswell GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 May 2013 (11 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 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 cores32096
Core clock speed200 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors392 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate48.007.200
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs42
TMUs4012

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceRing BusRing Bus

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 shared + 128 MB eDRAMDDR3L
Maximum RAM amountSystem shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 DependentPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.34.3
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan++

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 3.07
+172%
HD Graphics 400 1.13

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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1381
+207%
HD Graphics 400 450

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 HD18
+200%
6−7
−200%
4K7
+250%
2−3
−250%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Valorant 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 3
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Fortnite 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 5
+400%
1−2
−400%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+300%
2−3
−300%
Valorant 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
World of Tanks 52
+189%
18−20
−189%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Valorant 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
World of Tanks 21−24
+200%
7−8
−200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+220%
10−11
−220%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Valorant 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+200%
5−6
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+220%
5−6
−220%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Fortnite 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 200% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is 250% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.07 1.13
Recency 27 May 2013 1 April 2015
Chip lithography 22 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 6 Watt

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has a 171.7% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 57.1% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

The Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.


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 Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

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.


2.9 164 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 419 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 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.