HD Graphics 2500 vs ATI Radeon HD 4350
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4350 and HD Graphics 2500, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
HD Graphics 2500 outperforms ATI HD 4350 by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1275 | 1175 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 1.27 | no data |
Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Generation 7.0 (2012−2013) |
GPU code name | RV710 | Ivy Bridge GT1 |
Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
Release date | 30 September 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 April 2012 (12 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 cores | 80 | 48 |
Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 650 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 1150 MHz |
Number of transistors | 242 million | 392 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 22 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | unknown |
Texture fill rate | 4.800 | 6.900 |
Floating-point processing power | 0.096 TFLOPS | 0.1104 TFLOPS |
ROPs | 4 | 1 |
TMUs | 8 | 6 |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
Width | 1-slot | IGP |
Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | DDR3 | System Shared |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | System Shared |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | System Shared |
Memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB/s | no 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 Connectors | 2x DisplayPort | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11.1 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.0 |
OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.0 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.80 |
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.
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 | 6
−16.7%
| 7
+16.7%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−37.5%
|
10−12
+37.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−7.1%
|
30−33
+7.1%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−37.5%
|
10−12
+37.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−7.1%
|
30−33
+7.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−37.5%
|
10−12
+37.5%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−7.1%
|
30−33
+7.1%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how ATI HD 4350 and HD Graphics 2500 compete in popular games:
- HD Graphics 2500 is 17% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the HD Graphics 2500 is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD Graphics 2500 is ahead in 26 tests (76%)
- there's a draw in 8 tests (24%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 0.37 | 0.69 |
Recency | 30 September 2008 | 1 April 2012 |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 22 nm |
HD Graphics 2500 has a 86.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
The HD Graphics 2500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4350 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.