UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs outperforms HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics by a whopping 284% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1103 | 696 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 11.51 |
| Architecture | Terascale 3 (2010−2013) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) |
| GPU code name | no data | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) | 15 August 2020 (4 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 | 736 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 655 / 600 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1450 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 28 Watt |
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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | 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 bus width | 128 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | no data |
| Shared memory | + | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12_1 |
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 | 4−5
−325%
| 17
+325%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−450%
|
11
+450%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 19 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−700%
|
16
+700%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 15 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−12.5%
|
36
+12.5%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 16 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
+8%
|
25
−8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−73.3%
|
26
+73.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−650%
|
15
+650%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 14 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−150%
|
15
+150%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−75%
|
55−60
+75%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 14 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−60%
|
24
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−600%
|
14
+600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−186%
|
20−22
+186%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−88.9%
|
16−18
+88.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−33.3%
|
8
+33.3%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−75%
|
55−60
+75%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1150%
|
24−27
+1150%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8
−371%
|
30−35
+371%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−200%
|
30−35
+200%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−2200%
|
45−50
+2200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 7−8 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−233%
|
10−11
+233%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 5−6 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−6.7%
|
16−18
+6.7%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−250%
|
21−24
+250%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 0−1 | 14−16 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 46
+0%
|
46
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 29
+0%
|
29
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7
+0%
|
7
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10
+0%
|
10
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Sons of the Forest | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 325% 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 HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics is 8% faster.
- in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 2200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics is ahead in 1 test (2%)
- UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 34 tests (65%)
- there's a draw in 17 tests (33%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.09 | 4.19 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 15 August 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 10 nm |
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs has a 284.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7500G + HD 7550M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
