HD Graphics 2500 vs Quadro P400

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Quadro P400 with HD Graphics 2500, including specs and performance data.

Quadro P400
2017
2 GB GDDR5, 30 Watt
4.11
+523%

P400 outperforms HD Graphics 2500 by a whopping 523% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6881185
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.33no data
Power efficiency9.83no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Generation 7.0 (2012−2013)
GPU code nameGP107Ivy Bridge GT1
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date7 February 2017 (8 years ago)1 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$119.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores25648
Core clock speed1228 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1252 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors3,300 million392 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm22 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate20.036.900
Floating-point processing power0.641 TFLOPS0.1104 TFLOPS
ROPs161
TMUs166

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1002 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth32.06 GB/sno 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 Connectors3x mini-DisplayPortNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.64.0
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.80
CUDA6.1-

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 HD45−50
+463%
8
−463%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.67no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
World of Tanks 12
+0%
12
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
World of Tanks 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how Quadro P400 and HD Graphics 2500 compete in popular games:

  • Quadro P400 is 463% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 33 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.11 0.66
Recency 7 February 2017 1 April 2012
Chip lithography 14 nm 22 nm

Quadro P400 has a 522.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 57.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro P400 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 2500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro P400 is a workstation graphics card while HD Graphics 2500 is a desktop 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.


NVIDIA Quadro P400
Quadro P400
Intel HD Graphics 2500
HD Graphics 2500

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.


4.1 495 votes

Rate Quadro P400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1454 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Quadro P400 or HD Graphics 2500, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.