UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) vs ATI Radeon HD 5670

Place in the ranking	869	848
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.20	no data
Power efficiency	2.25	15.65
Architecture	TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)	Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code name	Redwood	Gen. 11
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	14 January 2010 (14 years ago)	11 January 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$119	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 cores	400	24
Core clock speed	775 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	800 MHz
Number of transistors	627 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	64 Watt	4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate	15.50	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.62 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	8	no data
TMUs	20	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
Length	168 mm	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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA	no data
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12_1
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	1.2	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. 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.

ATI HD 5670 2.08

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) 2.26
+8.7%

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.

ATI HD 5670 1468
+0.7%

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) 1458

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:

900p	26 −3.8%	27−30 +3.8%
Full HD	32 +146%	13 −146%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.72

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −5.6%	18−20 +5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −5.6%	18−20 +5.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 −8.3%	12−14 +8.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 −20%	6−7 +20%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 −5.6%	18−20 +5.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +200%	4 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

4K
High Preset

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

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Metro Exodus

0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Metro Exodus

0−1

This is how ATI HD 5670 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 4% faster in 900p
ATI HD 5670 is 146% faster in 1080p

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

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the ATI HD 5670 is 200% faster.
in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

ATI HD 5670 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is ahead in 21 test (39%)
there's a draw in 32 tests (59%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.08	2.26
Recency	14 January 2010	11 January 2021
Chip lithography	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	64 Watt	4 Watt

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) has a 8.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 1500% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon HD 5670 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU).

Be aware that Radeon HD 5670 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.