UHD Graphics 600 vs Radeon HD 6750

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6750 with UHD Graphics 600, including specs and performance data.

HD 6750
2011
2 GB GDDR5, 86 Watt
2.69
+213%

HD 6750 outperforms UHD Graphics 600 by a whopping 213% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8171140
Place by popularitynot in top-10052
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.15no data
Power efficiency2.1611.87
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameJuniperGemini Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date21 January 2011 (14 years ago)11 December 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$49.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores72096
Core clock speedno data200 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHz650 MHz
Number of transistors1,040 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)86 Watt5 Watt
Texture fill rate25.207.800
Floating-point processing power1.008 TFLOPS0.1248 TFLOPS
ROPs162
TMUs3612

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).

Bus supportPCIe 2.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length170 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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1050 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth73.6 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, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1112 (12_1)
Shader Model5.06.4
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan-+

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.

HD 6750 2.69
+213%
UHD Graphics 600 0.86

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

HD 6750 1041
+212%
UHD Graphics 600 334

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 6750 1260
+191%
UHD Graphics 600 433

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 HD30−35
+200%
10
−200%
1440p3−4
+200%
1
−200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.67no data
1440p16.66no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 13
+0%
13
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 11
+0%
11
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 7
+0%
7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
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%

This is how HD 6750 and UHD Graphics 600 compete in popular games:

  • HD 6750 is 200% faster in 1080p
  • HD 6750 is 200% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 38 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.69 0.86
Recency 21 January 2011 11 December 2017
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 86 Watt 5 Watt

HD 6750 has a 212.8% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 600, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1620% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 6750 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 600 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6750 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics 600 is a notebook one.

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 6750
Radeon HD 6750
Intel UHD Graphics 600
UHD Graphics 600

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.


3.4 289 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3668 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6750 or UHD Graphics 600, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.