HD Graphics 620 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and HD Graphics 620, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
40 Watt
10.58
+341%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS outperforms HD Graphics 620 by a whopping 341% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking436851
Place by popularitynot in top-10065
Power efficiency18.4411.15
Architectureno dataGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameno dataKaby Lake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateno data30 August 2016 (8 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 cores1536192
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistorsno data189 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rateno data24.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.384 TFLOPS
ROPsno data3
TMUsno data24

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).

Interfaceno dataRing 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 typeLPDDR5xDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4
Maximum RAM amountno data32 GB
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speed8448 MHzSystem 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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
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.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 10.58
+341%
HD Graphics 620 2.40

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 7061
+368%
HD Graphics 620 1509

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.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 24058
+315%
HD Graphics 620 5803

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.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 6982
+648%
HD Graphics 620 934

3DMark Time Spy Graphics

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS 1989
+520%
HD Graphics 620 321

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 HD39
+179%
14
−179%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Counter-Strike 2 23
+156%
9−10
−156%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+529%
7−8
−529%
Counter-Strike 2 22
+144%
9−10
−144%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry 5 31
+417%
6
−417%
Fortnite 60−65
+400%
12
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+291%
11
−291%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+300%
9
−300%
Valorant 90−95
+124%
40−45
−124%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+529%
7−8
−529%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+111%
9−10
−111%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 150−160
+249%
43
−249%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry 5 30
+900%
3−4
−900%
Fortnite 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+291%
10−12
−291%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%
Grand Theft Auto V 36
+1100%
3
−1100%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+200%
12−14
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 41
+720%
5
−720%
Valorant 90−95
+124%
40−45
−124%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+529%
7−8
−529%
Counter-Strike 2 17
+88.9%
9−10
−88.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry 5 27
+800%
3−4
−800%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+291%
10−12
−291%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+767%
3−4
−767%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+200%
12−14
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 22
+175%
8−9
−175%
Valorant 90−95
+124%
40−45
−124%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 60−65
+445%
10−12
−445%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+381%
16−18
−381%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+194%
16−18
−194%
Valorant 110−120
+455%
20−22
−455%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+400%
5−6
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+425%
4−5
−425%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+40%
14−16
−40%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Valorant 50−55
+342%
12−14
−342%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%

Full HD
High Preset

Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 24
+0%
24
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS and HD Graphics 620 compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 179% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is 1600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is ahead in 55 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.58 2.40
Chip lithography 4 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 15 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS has a 340.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

HD Graphics 620, on the other hand, has 166.7% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 620 in performance tests.

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.


Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS
Intel HD Graphics 620
HD Graphics 620

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.


2.3 14 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 2804 votes

Rate HD Graphics 620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 4.6 TFLOPS or HD Graphics 620, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.