HD Graphics 400 vs Radeon HD 6480G

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6480G and HD Graphics 400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 6480G
2011
35 Watt
0.65

HD Graphics 400 outperforms HD 6480G by an impressive 71% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11951088
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.3012.99
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Generation 8.0 (2014−2015)
GPU code nameSumoBraswell GT1
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 April 2015 (9 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 cores24096
Core clock speed444 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data600 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt
Texture fill rate5.3287.200
Floating-point processing power0.2131 TFLOPS0.1152 TFLOPS
ROPs42
TMUs1212

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).

InterfaceIGPRing 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 typeSystem SharedDDR3L
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem 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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK 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.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
Valorant 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−66.7%
30−33
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 12−14
−50%
18−20
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Valorant 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
Dota 2 12−14
−50%
18−20
+50%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−50%
12−14
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Valorant 27−30
−55.2%
45−50
+55.2%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−50%
6−7
+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 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−60%
24−27
+60%
Valorant 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 1.11
Recency 14 June 2011 1 April 2015
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

HD Graphics 400 has a 70.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6480G 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.


AMD Radeon HD 6480G
Radeon HD 6480G
Intel HD Graphics 400
HD Graphics 400

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.


2.9 138 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6480G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 420 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6480G or HD Graphics 400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.