HD Graphics 3000 vs Radeon HD 7730M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7730M and HD Graphics 3000, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 7730M
2012
2 GB DDR3, 25 Watt
2.01
+205%

HD 7730M outperforms HD Graphics 3000 by a whopping 205% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8851183
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.59no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Generation 6.0 (2011)
GPU code nameChelseaSandy Bridge GT2+
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date24 April 2012 (12 years ago)1 February 2011 (13 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 cores51296
Core clock speed575 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed675 MHz1300 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million1,160 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Wattunknown
Texture fill rate21.6015.60
Floating-point processing power0.6912 TFLOPS0.2496 TFLOPS
ROPs162
TMUs3212

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring 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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.63.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/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.

HD 7730M 2.01
+205%
HD Graphics 3000 0.66

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 7730M 774
+205%
HD Graphics 3000 254

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.

HD 7730M 7056
+350%
HD Graphics 3000 1568

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 HD17
+88.9%
9
−88.9%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+63.6%
10−12
−63.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+16.7%
30−33
−16.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how HD 7730M and HD Graphics 3000 compete in popular games:

  • HD 7730M is 89% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 7730M is 450% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 7730M is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.01 0.66
Recency 24 April 2012 1 February 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

HD 7730M has a 204.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 7730M is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 3000 in performance tests.


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.


AMD Radeon HD 7730M
Radeon HD 7730M
Intel HD Graphics 3000
HD Graphics 3000

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.


3.3 28 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7730M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 2380 votes

Rate HD Graphics 3000 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.