HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) vs ATI Radeon HD 4350
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 4350 with HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge), including specs and performance data.
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) outperforms ATI HD 4350 by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1274 | 1207 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 1.30 | no data |
Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | Gen. 7 Ivy Bridge (2012) |
GPU code name | RV710 | Ivy Bridge GT1 |
Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
Release date | 30 September 2008 (16 years ago) | 1 October 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 | 6 |
Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 350 MHz |
Boost clock speed | no data | 1100 MHz |
Number of transistors | 242 million | no data |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 22 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | no data |
Texture fill rate | 4.800 | no data |
Floating-point processing power | 0.096 TFLOPS | no data |
ROPs | 4 | no data |
TMUs | 8 | no data |
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 | no data |
Width | 1-slot | no data |
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 | no data |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64/128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | no data |
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 data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11.0 |
Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
Vulkan | N/A | - |
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.
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 | 7
−28.6%
| 9
+28.6%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Atomic Heart | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Atomic Heart | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
+27.3%
|
11
−27.3%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Dota 2 | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
Dota 2 | 10−11
−20%
|
12−14
+20%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Valorant | 27−30
−7.4%
|
27−30
+7.4%
|
1440p
High Preset
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 0−1 | 1−2 |
4K
High Preset
Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
Valorant | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how ATI HD 4350 and HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) compete in popular games:
- HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is 29% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the ATI HD 4350 is 27% faster.
- in Atomic Heart, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- ATI HD 4350 is ahead in 1 test (3%)
- HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is ahead in 20 tests (59%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (38%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 0.38 | 0.63 |
Recency | 30 September 2008 | 1 October 2012 |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 22 nm |
HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) has a 65.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
The HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4350 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 4350 is a desktop card while HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.