HD Graphics 400 vs Quadro K2000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro K2000M with HD Graphics 400, including specs and performance data.

K2000M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 55 Watt
2.62
+132%

K2000M outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8171080
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.31no data
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameN14P-Q3Braswell GT1
Market segmentMobile workstationDesktop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$265.27 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores38496
Core clock speed745 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data640 MHz
Number of transistors1,270 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate23.847.680
Floating-point processing power0.5722 gflops0.1229 gflops
ROPs162
TMUs3212

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
InterfaceMXM-A (3.0)PCIe 3.0 x1
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 typeDDR3DDR3L
Maximum RAM amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.3
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan+1.1.80
CUDA+-

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.

K2000M 2.62
+132%
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.

K2000M 1046
+132%
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 HD27
+170%
10−12
−170%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Hitman 3 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+138%
16−18
−138%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Hitman 3 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+138%
16−18
−138%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Hitman 3 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+133%
9−10
−133%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+138%
16−18
−138%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Hitman 3 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

This is how K2000M and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

  • K2000M is 170% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.62 1.13
Recency 1 June 2012 1 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 6 Watt

K2000M has a 131.9% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 816.7% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K2000M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro K2000M is a mobile workstation card while HD Graphics 400 is a desktop 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.


NVIDIA Quadro K2000M
Quadro K2000M
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

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.


3.7 32 votes

Rate Quadro K2000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 390 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.