HD Graphics 400 vs ATI Radeon HD 5770

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 5770 with HD Graphics 400, including specs and performance data.

ATI HD 5770
2009
1 GB GDDR5, 108 Watt
4.43
+292%

ATI HD 5770 outperforms HD Graphics 400 by a whopping 292% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6681078
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.89no data
Power efficiency2.8112.92
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameJuniperBraswell GT1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date13 October 2009 (15 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 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 cores80096
Core clock speed850 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data600 MHz
Number of transistors1,040 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)108 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate34.007.200
Floating-point processing power1.36 TFLOPS0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs162
TMUs4012

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 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length208 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5DDR3L
Maximum RAM amount1 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed4800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth76.8 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model5.05.1
OpenGL4.44.3
OpenCL1.23.0
VulkanN/A+

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:

900p24
+300%
6−7
−300%
Full HD50
+317%
12−14
−317%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.18no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+350%
6−7
−350%
Hitman 3 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+340%
10−11
−340%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Hitman 3 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+300%
7−8
−300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

This is how ATI HD 5770 and HD Graphics 400 compete in popular games:

  • ATI HD 5770 is 300% faster in 900p
  • ATI HD 5770 is 317% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.43 1.13
Recency 13 October 2009 1 April 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 8 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 108 Watt 6 Watt

ATI HD 5770 has a 292% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 400, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1700% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 5770 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 5770 is a desktop card while HD Graphics 400 is a notebook one.


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

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.


ATI Radeon HD 5770
Radeon HD 5770
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 673 votes

Rate Radeon HD 5770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 416 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.